Itwari and Others Vs Dudhe Ram and Others — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Chhattisgarh HC (2019)

Itwari and Others Vs Dudhe Ram and Others — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Chhattisgarh HC (2019)

1

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

Second Appeal No. 406 of 2007

Itwari, son of Sumeri, aged about 60 years,

Firtu, son of Sumeri, aged about 50 years,

Firanta, aged about 40 years, son of Sumeri,

All are Gond by caste, R/o. Vill. Sarakampa, Tahsil Chhuikhadan, Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.)

----Appellants/plaintiffs

Versus

Dead Dudhe Ram, son of Sujan through his legal heirs:-

A. Pusau Ram, aged about 48 years, son of Dudhe Ram Dhobi

B. Bhukhau Ram, aged about 40 years, son of Dudheram Dhobi,

C. Dhan Singh, aged about 35 years, son of Duydhe Ram Dhobi,

All are R/o. Vill Sarankapa, Tah. Chhuikhadan, Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.)

A. Bimla Bai, daughter of Mahangu, aged about 55 years,

B. Dayaram, aged about 42 years, son of Mahangu, Both R/o. Vill Sarankampa, Tah. Chhuikhadan, Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.)

A. Hariram, son of Bareth, aged about 32 years,

B. Belasiya Bai, aged about 29 years, widow of Late Budhu Bareth,

C. Bartanin Bai, widow of Late Budhu Bareth, aged about 55 years,

A. Ayodhya, aged about 50 years, son of Uderam Bareth.

B. Ghasiya, son of Ude Ram Bareth, aged about 48 years,

C. Gariba, aged about 35 years, son of Samaru, caste Dhobi,

No. 4(A)(B) resident of village Mohgaon, Tah. Chhuikhadan,

No. 4(C) R/o. Sarrakampa, Tah. Chhuikhadan, Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.)

Maniram, son of Putu through – legal heirs

A. Nammu Ram, aged about 50 years, son of Maniram Marar

2

B. Pardeshi Ram, aged about 47 years, son of Mani Ram Marar

C. Deshi Ram, aged about 43 years, son of Maniram Marar.

All R/o. Gandayee, Tahsil Chhuikhadan, Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.)

State of Madhya Pradesh, (Now C.G.) Thru- the District Collector, Rajnandgaon (C.G.)

---- Respondents.

For Petitioner : None present For Respondent No. 6/State : Ms. Shivali Dubey, PL

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal

Order On Board

05/11/2019

(1) Even after the matter was called in the second round, none appeared for the appellants, therefore, in these circumstances, this Court has no other option but to dismiss the second appeal for want of prosecution.

(2) Accordingly, the second appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.

Sd/-

(Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge

D/-

3