Ramkishun v. Pokhan
Case brief
What is this about?
Second appeal dismissed for want of prosecution as the appellant's counsel had passed away and substituted personal notice was reported unserved.
What the court decided
-1-
2025:CGHC:50851
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
SA No. 431 of 2017
Ramkishun S/o Late Gaur Singh, Aged About 58 Years R/o Village Sumartalab, Police Station Aamanaka, Tahsil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ...............Plaintiff
... Appellant (s)
versus
1 - Pokhan S/o Late Piluram, Aged About 47 Years
2 - Smt. Punni Bai W/o Late Khelan, Aged About 36 Years
3 - Chandraprabha D/o Late Khelan, Aged About 20 Years
4 - Ku. Rajeshwari Aged About 17 Years D/o Late Khelan (Deleted)
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Ramkishun S/o Late Gaur Singh
- respondent
Pokhan S/o Late Piluram
- respondent
Smt. Punni Bai W/o Late Khelan
- respondent
Chandraprabha D/o Late Khelan
- respondent
Ku. Rajeshwari D/o Late Khelan
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Chhattisgarh HC
- Decided on
- · October
- Registered
- Case no.
- SA/431/2017
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court