Appeal before the High Court of Chhattisgarh was dismissed for want of prosecution as none of the appellants were present.
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.
BEFORE THE HIGH OQURT OF J@E>ICAT0RE AT JABALPORo
/rr^SrAPPEAL fSO^b^ OF 19S8
APPEAI. impER SECTION 96 OP THE GOQE OP CIVIL PROCEDURE^
aaacatlal s©nof .Shri MithaUal Gwal, aged ai^oat 28 years^ ^:iver^ SEC^ resjLdoit of Tikcapara, Hear liaaaa-aianja Tank^ BLlaspar^ Qistt. BjLlasgar^
•»• APPEliL^NTS
Plainfclffs'
-yERStJS-
!• Sadharam son of MerMaal sittdfai^ aged about 5©years^
,...^ ^2, Manoharlal son of sbri Sacthara.'a SincltajL^ c<y ...• aged atooot 30 years^
aged atooot 30 years^
Batfa residents ofE&rbala Road, ^Ravidas Nagar, Jyne'Bilaspar, Bilaspar,
^ / v?''^A;.^oo~'' V?-''^<7 ,' ^ ^^ .<? <>e6cy\0\
^ aged aisoiat 58 xears' resident ©fiterbala R©ad,Ravidas &lagar, Btlaspar,
•»«RE^P©KGaEKTS ©ef@idati^!S-
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR
FirsbADpeal No.346 oF 1998
APPELLANTS/: 1. Bharablal
(PlaintifFs)
Versus
RESPONDENTS/: 1. Sadhuram
(DeFendants)
{Appeal under Section 96 oF bhe Code oF Civil Procedure}
Present:
None present For the appellants.
Mr. Lokesh KumarSingh, counsel For respondents No.1 &2.
None present For respondent No.3 also.
Sinale Bench: Hon'ble Mr. T.P. Sharma. J
ORDER
(5-7-2013)
Soma
Sd/T.P.Sharma , Judge
n 1
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mithailal Gwal
Sasil Govil
Sadharam
Manoharlal
Mithailal
T.P. Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
