The High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed the second appeal in the absence of the appellants, who failed to appear even on the second call, citing want of prosecution.
Second appeal dismissed for want of prosecution due to the absence of the appellants.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1N THE HIGU CCJURT OF MADHY A PmggH m JAEALmR
Of l99l
Second Appeal Jo.
¥
‘
wi£ow of Bashmu,
: l. ‘ SohagliBai 7
mumg
gExa’mwt Na k agea 55 years R/o Koh kapal
No.
Tansll Jagdalpur. (Eefendant
\Mangal 3/0 3ashmu Bna‘tra, aged
I L CccupatmmAgrlculturlst
4O years
f ' 1V0 Village Turenar, Tah Jagdal Pur,
Q
“(Def‘endant‘Nm
Dls‘tt Bastar. ‘
3. K \Budru, S/o Eashmu bhatra, aged
Occupatlon Agrlculturlst
35 years,
R/o Village lxohkapal, fah Jagdalour
No. e}
(mefendant
3Sukuldhhr, b/o Jashmu mhatra, aged
t
. Agriculturls
Occupatlon
3O years,
R/o V1llage karltgaon, Tahsll
Distt. Bastar.
Jagdalpur,
\ ‘ N/
(Eefendant
_ >_
kn
VERsus
f,
’
n l \smt l‘nanga] del, w/o Mangalsay, Bhatr ,
, @pONDENIs R/o Vlllage
aged abeut 5O years
Dlstt Bastar
Taknar , Tah Jagdalpur
'V ' ‘
L 2 w14 Qjka-Fv‘x a3” I
‘SmugM‘hiw5 uhclmé egr54vwfk ~
f Myra»!- 6orqt35 V, (L R.of Befen.No ;5
xmhansay, S/o Dasha Bhatra, Occupatlo n
3
(L R.of Be-E inc 5)
§ Agmculturlst. r
l
4.& ‘Bhalram, S/o Sasha, Bha‘cra Occupat l“
1 (L R of Eef No F5
§ Agrlcultxfrlst.
\Trllochan, 5/0 Sonu Bha’cra, aged
5.
Uccupatlon . Agrlcwturi et’
3 60 years ! (K R E£ 3 6f 0 6)
d
\Harina’ch’LS/o Budhsan Eha’bra ,
g6
s LccupatloA?n.r
5O year
we» .
| S.B.: Hon’ble Shri Justice Pras 9-3-2010 No one appears for the a1 Shri Parag Kotecha, cow? f No one appears for other |
hant Kumar Mishra ppellants. isel for respondent No.1. respondents. |
|
|---|---|---|
| Gopa) | The matter was passe( representation on behalf of the No one appears for the'a in the circumstance, the Court but to dismiss the seconc The second appea! is dis |
i over once in absence of any appellants. ppellants even in the second call. re is no other option left with the missed for want of prosecution. appeal for want of prosecution. F. n s Prashant Kumar Mishra ./’_J. Judge r ~ , # |
[new
Smt. L nothing del
Mangal Bhatra
Dasha Bhatra
Bhalram
Trilochan
Harinarach
Prashant Kumar Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
