Sukhram and Others v. Shanti Bai and Others
Case brief
What is this about?
In SA No. 199 of 2010, the Chhattisgarh High Court dismissed the second appeal because the appellant's counsel stated he had no instruction to prosecute the appeal.
In SA No. 199 of 2010, the Chhattisgarh High Court dismissed the second appeal because the appellant's counsel stated he had no instruction to prosecute the appeal.
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.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
SA No. 199 of 2010
1. Sukhrama s/o Nadi, aged about 40 years;
2. Sakharam S/o Nadi, aged about 42 years;
3. Mangli W/o Sakru, aged about 50 years;
4. Sudu S/o Sakru, aged about 35 years;
5. Sudar S/o Sakru, aged about 30 years;
6. Eben S/o Sakru, aged about 32 years;
7. Ghasia S/o Somaru, aged about 55 years;
8. Gagru, S/o Somaru, aged about 53 years;
9. Dhannu S/o Somaru, aged about 40 years;
10. Channu S/o Somaru, aged about 40 years;
11.Bisan S/o Balsai, aged about 32 years;12.Channor W/o Dasaru, aged about 30 years;13. Pakla S/o Dasaru, aged about 25 years;
14.Lalit S/o Dasaru, aged about 25 years;15.Hansraj S/o Dasaru, aged about 20 years;All are R/o Village Langoda, Tahsil
Kondagaon, Dsitrict Bastar, C.G.
---- Appellants
Versus
1. Shanti Bai W/o Manglu, aged about 35 years;
2. Mahesh S/o Manglu, aged about 26 years;
3. Ramesh S/o Manglu, aged about 22 years;
4. Dinesh S/o Manglu, aged about 20 years;
2
All are R/o Village Lanjoda, Tahsil
Kondagaon, District Bastar, C.G.
5. State of Chhattisgarh, through the
Collector, Bastar, at Jagdalpur, C.G.
---- Respondents
For Appellants :- Mr. R.S. Patel, Advocate.
For State/Respondent :- Mr. Animesh Tiwari, Dy. A.G.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal
Order on Board
18/01/2021
1. At the very outset, leaned counsel for the
appellants submits that he has no
instruction on behalf of the appellants to
prosecute the appeal.
2. Accordingly, the instant second appeal is
dismissed as having no instruction to
learned counsel.
Sd/-
(Sanjay K. Agrawal)
Judge
Ankit
Sukhrama s/o Nadi, Sakharam S/o Nadi, Mangli W/o Sakru, Sudu S/o Sakru, Sudar S/o Sakru, Eben S/o Sakru, Ghasia S/o Somaru, Gagru S/o Somaru, Dhannu S/o Somaru,
Shanti Bai W/o Manglu, Mahesh S/o Manglu, Ramesh S/o Manglu, Dinesh S/o Manglu
State of Chhattisgarh, through the Collector, Bastar
Sanjay K. Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court