Item No. 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL CRP(CRP.Art.227) No. 53 of 2019 1. The Chief Engineer-cum-Empowered Officer, Manipur State Rural Road Development Agency, New Secretariat Building North Block, P.O. Imphal, District- Imphal West, Manipur, Pin Code- 795001. 2. The Executive Engineer/Project Implementation Unit, Bishnupur Division, Manipur State Rural Road Development Agency, PWD Complex, Khoyathong, P.O.: Imphal, District – Imphal West, Manipur, Pin Code – 795001. Petitioner/s Vrs. Thokchom Prafulla Singh, aged about 66 years, S/o. (L) Thokchom Priyokumar Singh resident of Chingamathak Nameirakpam Leikai, P.O. & P.S. Singjamei, District Imphal West, Manipur, Pin Code – 795008. (Died on 04.09.2019 now represented by LRs) Vide order dated 20.02.2025 passed by the Hon’ble Court in MC(CRP(CRP.Art.227)) No. 82 of 2024 necessary amendments has been done in the cause-title of CRP(CRP.Art.227) No. 53 of 2019 in the following ways:- (i) Thokchom ongbi Sorojini Devi, aged about 71 years, wife of (L) Thokchom Prafulla Singh. (ii) Chitrani Devi Thokchom, aged about 30 years daughter of (Late) Thokchom Prafulla Singh. (iii) Bandana Devi Thokchom, aged about 27 years daughter of (Late) Thokchom Prafulla Singh. (iv) Sucherita Devi Thokchom, aged about 24 years daughter of (Late) Thokchom Prafulla Singh. All are resident of Chingamathak Nameirakpam Leikai, P. O. & P.S. Singjamei, District Imphal West at present residing at Singjamei Chingamakha Kshetri Leikai, P.O. & P.S. Singjamei, Imphal West District, Manipur – 795008. Respondent/s BEFORE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. M. SUNDAR For the petitioners : Mr. Romendro Sharma, Advocate For the respondents : Mr. Th. Henba, Advocate Date of Order : 10.06.2026 LAIREN MAYUM INDRAJE ET SINGH Digitally signed by LAIRENMAYUM INDRAJEET SINGH Date: 2026.06.10 20:09:43 +05'30' ORDER (ORAL) [1] Mr. Romendro Sharma, learned counsel on record for 2(two) revision petitioners is before this Court on the Video Conferencing (V.C.) platform. [2] Mr. Th. Henba, learned counsel on record for all respondents is before this Court (Physical Court). [3] Nucleus of the captioned CRP(Civil Revision Petition) is a civil suit being ‘Original (M) Suit No. 83 of 2017’ on the file of ‘Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) Imphal West, Manipur’. This civil suit shall be referred to as ‘said suit’ and the Court concerned shall be referred to as ‘said Trial Court’ (both for the sake of convenience and clarity). [4] Said suit was filed by respondents in captioned CRP with prayers for declaration and recovery of money qua work done in 2(two) parts viz., widening of road and laying of drainage line. [5] Defendant Nos. 2 & 3 in the said suit in the said Trial Court are revision petitioners in captioned CRP and in the captioned CRP, an order dated 05.07.2019 made by said Trial Court in Judl. Misc. Case No. 479 of 2018 rejecting an application with a prayer to condone the delay and permit the defendants to file written statement has been called in question. This ‘05.07.2019 order’ shall be referred to as ‘impugned order’. [6] It is not necessary to delve more into the matter or the impugned order as afore-referred learned counsel on both sides i.e., Mr. Romendro Sharma, learned counsel on record for 2(two) revision petitioners and Mr. Th. Henba, learned counsel on record for all respondents, submit in one voice and in unison that the said suit itself has since been withdrawn by the plaintiffs and therefore, the captioned CRP has become infructuous. Though the respondents are plaintiffs in said Trial Court, learned counsel for respondents while confirming that the said suit has been withdrawn, was not able to readily produce the withdrawal order. Therefore, this Court went into the e-Court website and ferreted out the details of said suit. The e-Court website brings to light that as rightly pointed out by learned counsel on both sides, said suit in said Trial Court has since been withdrawn on 23.03.2026 and a scanned reproduction of the download from the e-Court website is as follows: [7] In the light of the narration thus far, more particularly in the light of common submission made by learned counsel on both sides i.e., that the said suit which is the nucleus of the matter has since been withdrawn and therefore captioned CRP has become infructuous, captioned CRP is disposed of as closed, the same having become infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. CHIEF JUSTICE Indrajeet