Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 18633 (CHH)

SMT. SHRINGARKALI AGRAWAL v. JEEVRAKHAN SAHU

CR/68/2024 · 2025-07-14

Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:33073 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CR No. 68 of 2024 1 - Smt. Shringarkali Agrawal W/o Shri N.N. Agrawal, Aged About 78 Years R/o 1/35, Satyam Kutir, Kota, Raipur, Tehsil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Through Her Power Of Attorney Holder Shri Ravish Agrawal, Presently Aged About 53 Years, R/o Shri Niranjan Narayan Agrawal, R/o 226, Samta Colony, Raipur, District-Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ----- (Defendant No.1) ... Petitioner/Applicant versus 1 - Jeevrakhan Sahu S/o Late Shri Vishal Sahu, Aged About 46 Years R/o Behind Radhakrishna Mandir, Near Hanuman Mandir, Daganiya, Post Office Sunder Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Mob. 9754428549 ---(Plaintiff) 2 - Lokmanya Sahkari Grih Nirman Sanstha Maryadit Raipur, Tehsil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, A Registered Co-Operative Society Under The Mp Co-Operative Societies Registration Act, 1960 (Registration No. Deputy Registrar/r.P.R./95/82-83) Head Office Maharashtra Bhawan, G.E. Road, Raipur, Tehsil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh Through President/vice President /secretary/signatory/officer Shri Kamlakar S/o Balaji Kusare, R/o Tatyapara, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ----(Defendant No.2) 3 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ----(Defendant No.3) ... Respondents For Petitioner/Applicant : Shri Anurag Khatri, Advocate on behalf of Shri Vivek Kumar Agrawal, Advocate For Respective Respondents : Shri Jitendra Gupta, Advocate and Shri Atanu Ghosh, Dy. Government Advocate Digitally signed by GOPAL SINGH Date: 2025.07.18 19:44:02 +0530 2 Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 15/07/2025 1. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the original civil suit has been dismissed for want of prosecution, as such he is withdrawing this revision, however, he is seeking liberty that in case the civil suit is restored, he may be allowed to file an appropriate revision or an application for availing remedy available under the law. 2. In view of the foregoing, the revision is dismissed as having become infructuous with the aforesaid liberty. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) JUDGE Gopal Singh