{"id":49391,"date":"2007-05-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-05-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/messrs-maruti-clean-coaland-power-vs-3-messrs-kartikeya-coal-washeries-on-15-may-2007"},"modified":"2017-07-28T15:19:00","modified_gmt":"2017-07-28T09:49:00","slug":"messrs-maruti-clean-coaland-power-vs-3-messrs-kartikeya-coal-washeries-on-15-may-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/messrs-maruti-clean-coaland-power-vs-3-messrs-kartikeya-coal-washeries-on-15-may-2007","title":{"rendered":"Messrs Maruti Clean Coaland Power … vs 3 Messrs Kartikeya Coal Washeries … on 15 May, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"
Chattisgarh High Court<\/div>\n
Messrs Maruti Clean Coaland Power … vs 3 Messrs Kartikeya Coal Washeries … on 15 May, 2007<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n        IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR        \n\n       WPC No 1881 of 2007\n\n       Messrs Maruti Clean Coaland Power Limited\n\n                                   ...Petitioners\n\n                                       VERSUS\n\n       1 South Eastern Coalfield Limited\n\n       2 Government of Chhattisgarh\n\n       3 Messrs Kartikeya Coal Washeries Private Limited\n\n                                   ...Respondents\n\n!      Shri B P Sharma Advocate for the petitioner\n\n^      Shri P S Nair and Shri H B Agrawal Senior Advocates with Shri P S Koshy and Shri Pakaj Agrawal Advocates for the resp\n\n       Shri Yashwant Singh Thakur Govt Advocate for the respondent No 2\n\n       Shri K N Bhatt and Shri P Diwakar Senior Advocates with Shri Kulbharat and Shri P R Patankar Advocate for the respond\n\n       Honble Mr Justice Satish K Agnihotri\n\n       Dated: 15\/05\/2007\n\n:      Order\n\n\n            WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE    \n                     COSTITUTION OF INDIA\n\n                           O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n
              (Passed on this 15th  of May, 2007)<\/p>\n
       1.         By  this  petition under Article 227  of  the<\/p>\n
          Constitution of India the petitioner impugns the order dated<\/p>\n
          21.2.2007 (Annexure P\/1) passed by the Civil Judge Class-II,<\/p>\n
          Katghora, district- Korba in Civil Suit No. 90-A\/2004, wherein<\/p>\n
          and whereby the application of the respondent No.3, filed under<\/p>\n
          Order 1 Rule 10 of the C.P.C. was allowed for impleading the<\/p>\n
          applicant as necessary party in the suit filed by the<\/p>\n
          respondent No.1\/plaintiff.\n<\/p>\n
2.        The indisputable facts, in nutshell, are that the
\nrespondent No.1\/plaintiff filed a suit for declaration and
\npermanent injunction in regard to the land bearing Khasra No.
\n594, part 611 and 616, total area 37.91, situated at village –
\nRantija, which was allotted on lease to the
\npetitioner\/defendant No.2. The claim of the petitioner for
\ndeclaration and permanent injunction was based on the facts
\nthat under the provisions of the Coal Bearing Areas
\n(Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 (herein after referred
\nto as `the Act, 1957′), after notification issued under the
\nprovisions of Section 4 and Section 9 of the Act, 1957 the
\ndisputed land vested in the Central Government by virtue of the
\nprovisions of Section 11 of the Act, 1957 and as such the said
\nland got vested in the plaintiff\/Coal Fields\/Respondent No.1\n<\/p>\n
3.        Thus the suit was filed on 9.12.2004 (Annexure P\/2)
\nagainst the State Government and the petitioner was also
\nimpleaded as party because the said land was allotted to the
\npetitioner\/defendant No.2 on lease by the State Government.\n<\/p>\n
4.        In the pending suit, the newly impleaded defendant
\nNo.3\/respondent No.3 filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10
\nof the C.P.C. to implead the respondent No.3 as a
\nparty\/defendant on the ground that the respondent No.3 has made
\nan application to the State Government for allotment of
\nremaining 13 acres of land from the same Khasra numbers which
\nwere involved in the pending suit.\n<\/p>\n
5.        Learned Court below after having considered the
\narguments of learned counsel appearing for the parties came to
\nthe conclusion that the respondent No.3 would substantially be
\naffected by the decision in the pending suit.\n<\/p>\n
       6.        Shri B. P. Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the<\/p>\n
          petitioner would submit that the respondent No.3, which has<\/p>\n
          filed the application under Order 1 Rule 10, was neither a<\/p>\n
          necessary nor proper party, as it has nothing to do with the<\/p>\n
          land in question in the pending civil suit. The remaining part<\/p>\n
          for which the respondent No.3 has made an application to the<\/p>\n
          State Government for allotment to the respondent No.3 has<\/p>\n
          nothing to do with the subject matter of the suit.\n<\/p>\n
7.        Shri P. S. Nair & Shri H. B. Agrawal, learned senior
\ncounsel with Shri P. S. Koshy & Shri Pankaj Agrawal, learned
\ncounsel appearing for the plaintiff\/respondent No.1 would
\nsupport the case of the petitioner and the plaintiff\/respondent
\nNo.1 has submitted in its return, as under:-\n<\/p>\n
          “2.6  The  respondent no. 3 filed an application  for
\n          impleading  as  one of the defendant  under  Order-I,
\n          Rule-10  of the Code of Civil Procedure only  on  the
\n          ground that he applied for lease of 13 Acres of  land
\n          situated  at Village-Nawagaon, Tehsil-Pali,  District
\n          Korba  and  bearing Khasra No. 850\/23 on lease  basis
\n          from  State Government. It is submitted that by  mere
\n          filing  of  an application for lease does not  confer
\n          any  right  upon the Respondent No.3 which  could  be
\n          enforce in a court of law. However the suit land is a
\n          different  land  situated in different Village-Ratija
\n          and  therefore the application under Order-I, Rule-10
\n          should  have  been  rejected. However  learned  Trial
\n          Court   under  grave  misconception  of   facts   and
\n          circumstances   allowed  the   application   of   the
\n          respondent No.3 by the impugned order.”<\/p>\n
       8.        Shri Yashwant Singh Thakur, learned Government<\/p>\n
          Advocate, appearing for the State Government also supported the<\/p>\n
          contention of the plaintiff\/respondent No.1 and the petitioner.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
          The State has  submitted in it’s return, as under:-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
          “3.   In  replied  filed by the answering  respondent
\n          before  the  Trial  Court  opposing  application   of
\n          respondent  No.3 for impleadment, it has been  stated
\n          by  the answering respondent that the land for  which
\n          the said respondent No.3 has moved an application for
\n          allotment bears Khasra No. 850\/23 whereas the present
\n          suit  pertains to Khasra No.s 850\/30, 850\/24, 850\/31,
\n          850\/27,  850\/28 and 850\/32 area 37.91 acres  situated
\n          at  village Ratija (Navagaonkhurd). It would thus  be
\n          clear  that the two parcels of lands being  different
\n          the  respondent No.3 had no locus in intervene in the
\n          suit and seek his impleadment as defendant.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
          4…..It   is   respectfully   submitted   that   the
\n          respondent  No.3  is  not  a  proper  party  for  the
\n          purposes  of  the lands involved in the suit.  It  is
\n          settled law that any judgment passed in civil suit is
\n          binding only upon the parties to the suit, therefore,
\n          the  respondent  No.3 will not  be  affected  in  any
\n          manner with the result of the suit.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       9.        Per contra, Shri K. N. Bhatt & Shri P. Diwakar,<\/p>\n
          learned senior counsel with Shri Kulbharat & Shri P. R.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
          Patankar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3,<\/p>\n
          would submit that it is true that a part of the disputed Khasra<\/p>\n
          lands have been allotted to the petitioner and the petitioner<\/p>\n
          has made an application for allotment of the remaining land. In<\/p>\n
          case the remaining land is allotted to the petitioner, in<\/p>\n
          future, the respondent No.3 would substantially be affected.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
          Thus, in order to avoid multiplication of the suit, the<\/p>\n
          respondent No.3 is a proper and necessary party to be impleaded<\/p>\n
          in the suit. He would further submit that the presence of the<\/p>\n
          respondent No.3 would help the Court for proper adjudication of<\/p>\n
          the dispute.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
10.       I have heard learned counsel appearing for the
\nparties and perused the pleadings and documents, appended
\nthereto.\n<\/p>\n
11.       The Court below has completely ignored the fact that
\nthe suit was filed with regard to the land allotted to the
\npetitioner only, may be the total area of the land in Khasra
\nNo. 594, 611, 666 is 58.65 acres and out of 58.56 acres total
\narea allotted to the petitioner\/defendant No.2 was 37.91 acres.
\nThe plaintiff\/respondent No.1 had sought for declaration and
\npermanent injunction in respect of only 37.91 Acres of the
\nland, which was allotted to the petitioner. The relevant clause
\nto that effect in plaint reads as under:-\n<\/p>\n
          ”  izfroknh  dzekad 2 dksy ok’kjh daiuh gS-  izfroknh
\n          daiuh  oknHkwfe ftldh foLr`r tkudkjh okn i= esa layXu
\n          ekufp= esa yky jax ls iznf’kZr dh x;h gS- oknHkwfe ds
\n          Hkhrj xzke jrhtk dh Hkwfe [kljk uacj 594 dk Hkkx  611
\n          dk Hkkx 616 dk Hkkx ‘kkfey gS-  ”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       12.       The Court below has further ignored the fact that the<\/p>\n
          newly impleaded defendant No.3 was not allotted any land till<\/p>\n
          date. The respondent No.3 itself in it’s application (Annexure<\/p>\n
          R-3\/2) has requested for allotment of 13 acres of remaining<\/p>\n
          land of Khasra No. 850\/23, which, according to the respondent<\/p>\n
          No.3, is new number of the same disputed land, at village<\/p>\n
          Ratija. It is beneficial to quote the application of the<\/p>\n
          respondent No.3, which is as under:-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
          ” izfr]
\n               Jheku ftyk\/;{k egksn;]
\n               Dksjck
\n          fo”k; %& dksyokljh gsrq Hkwfe vkoaVu gsrq-
\n          egksn;]
\n                    fo”k;kUrxZr fuosnu gS fd
\n          1-   es- dkfrZds; dksyok’kjh xzke jrhtk esa dksyok’kjh dh
\n            LFkkiuk djuk pkgrh gS-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
2-   gesa Kkr gqvk gS fd xzke jrhtk esa [kljk uacj 850@23 esa
\n13 ,dM Hkwfe fjDr gS-\n<\/p>\n
            vr%  egksn;  ls fuosnu gS fd d`i;k gesa  Hkw&vkcaVu
\n          djus dk d”V djsa rkfd m?kksx dh ‘kh\/kz LFkkiuk dh  tk
\n          lds-  bl  gsrq  leLr vkSipkfjdrk iw.kZ djus  gsrq  ge
\n          lgefr nsrs gSa-<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n          layXu&\n          1-   vkosfnr tehu dk uD'kk              lgh@& vLi\"V\n          2-   ifj;kstuk izfrosnu-\n          izfrfyfi &\n<\/pre>\n
          1-   Jheku vuqfoHkkxh; vf\/kdkjh] dV?kksjk
\n2-   egkizca\/kd ftyk m|ksx dsUnz dksjck dks vko’;d dk;Zokgh
\ngsrq- ”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
        It  is indisputable that the remaining land admeasuring<\/p>\n
       13  acres  which  was  not the  subject  matter  of  the<\/p>\n
       dispute  has  not  yet been allotted to  the  respondent<\/p>\n
       No.3.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       13.       The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Razia Begum v. Sahebzadi<\/p>\n
          Anwar Begum and others (AIR<\/a> 1958 SC 886), while considering the<\/p>\n
          question of addition of party in an application under order 1<\/p>\n
          Rule 10(2) of the C.P.C. held as under:-<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
               “13 (2) That in a suit relating to property,  in<\/p>\n
               order that a person may be added as a party,  he<\/p>\n
               should  have  a direct interest as distinguished<\/p>\n
               from  a  commercial interest,  in  the  subject-<\/p>\n
               matter of the litigation;”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       14.       The Hon’ble Supreme Court in J. J. Lal Pvt. Ltd. and<\/p>\n
          others Vs. M.R.Murali and another { (2002) 3 SCC 98}  has<\/p>\n
          observed that in the case of title between two persons, the<\/p>\n
          presence of third party is neither necessary for the decision<\/p>\n
          of the question involved, nor his presence is necessary to<\/p>\n
          enable the Court effectually and completely to adjudicate upon<\/p>\n
          and settle the questions involved in the proceedings.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n
15.       In the case on hand, the basis question involved is
\nasto whether the property which is allotted to the petitioner
\nin question vests in the respondent No.1 Coal Fields or in the
\nState Government in view of the provisions of the Act, 1957 and
\nafter the notification dated 9.11.1986 under the provisions of
\nSection 4 and 9 of the said Act, 1957.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
16.       Without going into the merits of the case, as the
\nsame may prejudice the rights of the parties, I am of the
\nconsidered opinion that the respondent No.3 is neither a
\nnecessary nor proper party for adjudication of the question of
\nlaw involved in the suit bearing No. 90-A\/2004 (South Eastern
\nCoal Fields Ltd. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & another).\n<\/p>\n
17.       There is apparent error and perversity in the
\nimpugned order passed by the Court below and the same deserves
\nto be set aside.\n<\/p>\n
18.       In the result, the petition is allowed. The order
\ndated 21.2.2007 (Annexure P\/1) passed by the Civil Judge Class-
\nII, Katghora, district- Korba in Civil Suit No. 90-A\/2004, is
\nset aside. No order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n
J U D G E<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Chattisgarh High Court Messrs Maruti Clean Coaland Power … vs 3 Messrs Kartikeya Coal Washeries … on 15 May, 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No 1881 of 2007 Messrs Maruti Clean Coaland Power Limited …Petitioners VERSUS 1 South Eastern Coalfield Limited 2 Government of Chhattisgarh 3 Messrs Kartikeya Coal Washeries […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[12,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-49391","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-chattisgarh-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nMessrs Maruti Clean Coaland Power ... vs 3 Messrs Kartikeya Coal Washeries ... on 15 May, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/messrs-maruti-clean-coaland-power-vs-3-messrs-kartikeya-coal-washeries-on-15-may-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Messrs Maruti Clean Coaland Power ... vs 3 Messrs Kartikeya Coal Washeries ... on 15 May, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/messrs-maruti-clean-coaland-power-vs-3-messrs-kartikeya-coal-washeries-on-15-may-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2007-05-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-07-28T09:49:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/messrs-maruti-clean-coaland-power-vs-3-messrs-kartikeya-coal-washeries-on-15-may-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/messrs-maruti-clean-coaland-power-vs-3-messrs-kartikeya-coal-washeries-on-15-may-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Messrs Maruti Clean Coaland Power … vs 3 Messrs Kartikeya Coal Washeries … on 15 May, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-05-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-28T09:49:00+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/messrs-maruti-clean-coaland-power-vs-3-messrs-kartikeya-coal-washeries-on-15-may-2007\"},\"wordCount\":1621,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Chattisgarh High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/messrs-maruti-clean-coaland-power-vs-3-messrs-kartikeya-coal-washeries-on-15-may-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/messrs-maruti-clean-coaland-power-vs-3-messrs-kartikeya-coal-washeries-on-15-may-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/messrs-maruti-clean-coaland-power-vs-3-messrs-kartikeya-coal-washeries-on-15-may-2007\",\"name\":\"Messrs Maruti Clean Coaland Power ... vs 3 Messrs Kartikeya Coal Washeries ... on 15 May, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-05-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-28T09:49:00+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/messrs-maruti-clean-coaland-power-vs-3-messrs-kartikeya-coal-washeries-on-15-may-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/messrs-maruti-clean-coaland-power-vs-3-messrs-kartikeya-coal-washeries-on-15-may-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/messrs-maruti-clean-coaland-power-vs-3-messrs-kartikeya-coal-washeries-on-15-may-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Messrs Maruti Clean Coaland Power … vs 3 Messrs Kartikeya Coal Washeries … on 15 May, 2007\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Messrs Maruti Clean Coaland Power ... vs 3 Messrs Kartikeya Coal Washeries ... on 15 May, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/messrs-maruti-clean-coaland-power-vs-3-messrs-kartikeya-coal-washeries-on-15-may-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Messrs Maruti Clean Coaland Power ... vs 3 Messrs Kartikeya Coal Washeries ... on 15 May, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/messrs-maruti-clean-coaland-power-vs-3-messrs-kartikeya-coal-washeries-on-15-may-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-05-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-07-28T09:49:00+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/messrs-maruti-clean-coaland-power-vs-3-messrs-kartikeya-coal-washeries-on-15-may-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/messrs-maruti-clean-coaland-power-vs-3-messrs-kartikeya-coal-washeries-on-15-may-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Messrs Maruti Clean Coaland Power … vs 3 Messrs Kartikeya Coal Washeries … on 15 May, 2007","datePublished":"2007-05-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-28T09:49:00+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/messrs-maruti-clean-coaland-power-vs-3-messrs-kartikeya-coal-washeries-on-15-may-2007"},"wordCount":1621,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Chattisgarh High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/messrs-maruti-clean-coaland-power-vs-3-messrs-kartikeya-coal-washeries-on-15-may-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/messrs-maruti-clean-coaland-power-vs-3-messrs-kartikeya-coal-washeries-on-15-may-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/messrs-maruti-clean-coaland-power-vs-3-messrs-kartikeya-coal-washeries-on-15-may-2007","name":"Messrs Maruti Clean Coaland Power ... vs 3 Messrs Kartikeya Coal Washeries ... on 15 May, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-05-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-28T09:49:00+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/messrs-maruti-clean-coaland-power-vs-3-messrs-kartikeya-coal-washeries-on-15-may-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/messrs-maruti-clean-coaland-power-vs-3-messrs-kartikeya-coal-washeries-on-15-may-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/messrs-maruti-clean-coaland-power-vs-3-messrs-kartikeya-coal-washeries-on-15-may-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Messrs Maruti Clean Coaland Power … vs 3 Messrs Kartikeya Coal Washeries … on 15 May, 2007"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49391","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=49391"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49391\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=49391"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=49391"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=49391"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}