Dismissed¶19
Ramadhar Dewangan v. Ganpat Dewangan and another
Chhattisgarh HCSA/327/2016
Case brief
AI extract
What is this about?
Chhattisgarh High Court second appeal (SA No. 327 of 2016) dismissed for want of prosecution; appellant/plaintiff Ramadhar Dewangan unreachable (letter returned marked addressee dead); legal heirs gave no instructions; counsel Abhishek Sharma pleaded no instruction; panel lawyer Ajay Kumrani for respondents incl. State of Chhattisgarh; decided 19/11/2025 by Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal; purely procedural dismissal — no statute, precedent, or substantive issue adjudicated.
What did the court decide?
In view of counsel's submissions that he has no instruction from the appellant or his legal heirs, the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. ¶19