This is a second appeal against an appellate judgment dismissing an appeal as withdrawn. The wife of the appellant and defendant no. 3 had previously withdrawn the appeal. The case appears to be a brief order regarding the fate of the petition.
The second appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.
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.
\ A; gycwéi/ w 'éOURT * ‘SPUR OF CWTTISGARHAT (8.3.) 0 ?‘° we $WHQ mm
‘ Q’mLU/s 100C P C VALUED AT Rs 1268L). é?gyr’mLmNT ,: Puran La]. Sahu S/o Shri Kishan Lal / Sahu, aged about 52 years, ¢\N,f#, cultivator, resident of village § V:M NH ‘\ v i 1./,4 , Chedia,Distt. DurgP.O. (C.G.).& Tahsil Gurur ~‘zwxrm a x VERSUS / ESPONDENTS (1)75mt Piteshwara. Sahu w/o shrJ. Bahur Lal Sahu, aged about 48 years, House w1£e, resident o£ Patharagudapara, Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar (C.G.) (Plaintiff/kppellant) Contesting Party. Kishan Lal Sahu S/o Shri
V £02) f MansukhVDas Sahu, aged about 80 years, cultivator,resident of village Chedia, Taho Gurur, Distt. Durg (C.G.). (gefendant/ReSpendent No . 1') Formal Party.
m
“w
‘M’wMAw-
(3)}Bahur L‘al Sahu S/o Kishan Lal Sahu, aged about 56 years, Advocate, resident of Pathara J Guda Para, Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar ( C.G.). I) (Defendant/ReSpondent No.3) Formal Barty. Mf'” SECOND APPEAL UNDER SECTION 00READWTI‘H ORDER XMI ” RULE l CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE! 1976 (AMENDED 2002) AGAINST ‘THE APPELLATE JUDGEMENT AND DEGREE Being aggrieved/16y the judgement and decree passedon 06-02-2003 in Civil appeal No. l‘
WW m
g‘H Q¢0163 In 20
mm (W)
mqfa’h RWY ii fg'z'k Wan
WWW it m Wm
$ 3. : Hm‘ble Sin-i $a ti’.
i34§42§1$
:3hri Am§yakani Tiwa I ! Eeameai wunsei far the appeiiagi.
Sm EN Jha, ieam Gwnsei fig! {eggawieaii
Leamed. gagmgei ft: ihe apgeliant sa§m§t3 that ag ihé
waiter has hear! gettfeé a igabiy hy the parties, tharefme, Ehe
agpeiiant be genrnittad in vxéithdfaw the appeaé.
E19 agpeiiant is pea‘nitted it) wiimraw the apgygaé as iha
mattaf hag amiably been sietiled.
The appeai is di5mis$ec£ as wiihdfawri.
Sdl-
Sanjay K. Agrawal
1.3: :m!
Judge
{
1
<br>v
L_
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appeal is liable to be dismissed as withdrawn when the wife of the appellant and defendant no. 3 amends the withdrawal to cover the appellant.
Puran Lal Sahu
Mansukh Das Sahu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
