SANDHYA DEVI Vs. SANJEEV KUMAR GUPTA @ CHUNNU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INVOKING the civil revisional jurisdiction under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure (henceforth 'the Code') the applicants/plaintiffs have assailed the order dated 24-3-2008 passed by the District Judge, Ambikapur in Civil Suit No. 9-A/2003, whereby the application of the applicants/plaintiffs under Order 23 Rule 1 (3) of the Code dated 12-3-2008 seeking withdrawal of the suit with liberty to institute a fresh suit was dismissed.

(2.) IT is not disputed that in Civil Suit No. 9-A/2003 evidence of the parties has not begun.

(3.) THE defendants denying the averments of the plaintiff in toto resisted the claim of the plaintiffs on the averment that the Saw Mill of the applicants/plaintiffs was established on the suit land in the year 1948. Father of the non-applicants Late Kashichand Gupta and Late Satyanarayan Gupta had title to the suit land by birth. It was further pleaded that in an earlier suit Civil Suit No. 2-A/98 the plaintiff had admitted that he neither had title nor possession over the suit land. It was specifically denied that on 11-11-2003 the defendants had started digging work on the suit land to establish a Saw Mill.