Second appeal where both appellant and first respondent died and counsel had no instructions from the appellant's legal representatives; the High Court dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution.
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
Digitally signed by SAGRIKA SAGRIKA AGRAWAL AGRAWAL Date:2025.11.14 10:22:39 +0530
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
SA No. 368 of 2017
1 - Paluram Patel S/o Shri Anant Patel, Aged About 71 Years R/o Village Pusaur, Tahsil Pusaur, District Raigarh, Civil And Revenue District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ..............Plaintiff, Chhattisgarh
... appellant(s)
versus
1 - Chaitan Gupta S/o Madhu Gupta, Aged About 63 Years R/o Pusaur, Tahsil Pusaur, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh
2 - State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Collector, Raigarh, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ..........Defendants, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
... Respondent(s)
Order on Board
13/11/2025 Mr. Vikash Shrivastava, on behalf of Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the appellant. Mr. Tarkeshwar Nande, Panel Lawyer for the Respondent/ State. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the
2
| sagrika | appellant as well as Respondent No. 1 have died in the appeal and despite their efforts, the LRs of the appellant is not taken care and has not in contact with them to pursue this appeal and now they have no instruction from the LRs of the appellant. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant, the present appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge |
|---|
Paluram Patel
Chaitan Gupta
State Of Chhattisgarh
Ravindra Kumar Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
