1 2025:CGHC:49071 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SA No. 378 of 2014 1 - Anup Kumar And Ors. S/o Devi Prasad Aged About 48 Years R/o Village- Baloda, P.S. Baloda, Distt. Janjgir-Champa C.G., Chhattisgarh 2 - Arvind Kumar S/o Devi Prasad Aged About 44 Years R/o Village- Baloda, P.S. Baloda, Distt. Janjgir-Champa C.G., District : Janjgir- Champa, Chhattisgarh 3 - Anusuiya S/o Devi Prasad Aged About 36 Years R/o Village- Baloda, P.S. Baloda, Distt. Janjgir-Champa C.G., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 4 - Amish Kumar S/o Dev Prasad Aged About 36 Years R/o Village- Baloda, P.S. Baloda, Distt. Janjgir-Champa C.G., District : Janjgir- Champa, Chhattisgarh 5 - Abhilekh Kumar S/o Dev Prasad Aged About 33 Years R/o Village- Baloda, P.S. Baloda, Distt. Janjgir-Champa C.G., District : Janjgir- Champa, Chhattisgarh 6 - Anita S/o Dev Prasad Aged About 34 Years R/o Village- Baloda, P.S. Baloda, Distt. Janjgir-Champa C.G., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 7 - Sunita D/o Dev Prasad Aged About 32 Years R/o Village- Baloda, 2 P.S. Baloda, Distt. Janjgir-Champa C.G., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 8 - Ful Bai Now Died D/o R/o Village- Baloda, P.S. Baloda, Distt. Janjgir- Champa C.G., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ... Appellants versus 1 - Anil Kumar And Ors. S/o Chandrika Prasad Aged About 44 Years R/o Village- Baloda, P.S. Baloda, Distt. Janjgir-Champa C.G., Chhattisgarh 2 - Prabha Devi Now Died D/o 3 - State Of Chhattisgarh D/o Thru- The Collector, Janjgir-Champa, Distt. Janjgir-Champa C.G., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Appellants : None For State/Respondent no. 3 : Mr. Kalpesh Ruparel, Panel Lawyer Hon’bl Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order on Board 24.09.2025 1. No one appeared on behalf of appellants on 10.06.2025 and case was adjourned for 05.08.2025. Again no one appeared on behalf of appellants and Court issued fixed dated SPC to appellants for their appearance, fixing the case for 24.09.2025. 2. SPC sent to the appellants by this Court vide order dated 05.08.2025 are reported to be served. 3. Today also there is no representation on behalf of appellants, even when the case is taken up for hearing in the second round. 3 4. In above facts of the case, it appears that appellants have lost their interest to prosecute this appeal and therefore, it is dismissed for want of prosecution. sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge alfiza ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2025.09.26 10:44:05 +0530