NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 827 of 2021 1 - Vijay Chauhan S/o Akbar Chauhan Aged About 22 Years Cast Cheek, R/o Village Kotiya Naditola, P.S. Naryanpur, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Devraj Yadav S/o Chatro Yadav Cast Mahkul, R/o Village Kotiya Naditola, P.S. Narayanpur, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. ...Appellants versus 1 - Gangadhra Vaishnav S/o Late Pandey Das Aged About 50 Years All Were The Cast Vaishnav, R/o Village Kotiya, P.S. Narayanpur, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Smt. Kamla Bai W/d Gangadhar Vaishnav Aged About 49 Years All Were The Cast Vaishnav, R/o Village Kotiya, P.S. Narayanpur, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Smt. Rambha Vaishnav Wd/o Late Manohar Das Aged About 24 Years All Were The Cast Vaishnav, R/o Village Kotiya, P.S. Narayanpur, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Minor Khosboo, D/o Late Manohar Das, Aged About 6 Years All Were The Claimants And Resp. No. 4-6 Were Represented Through Their Natural Gaurdian Mother Smt. Rambha Vaishnav, Wd/o Late Manohar Das, Aged About 24 Years, And All Were The Cast Vaishnav, R/o Village Kotiya, P.S. Narayanpur, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Minor Sonam, D/o Late Manohar Das, Aged About 4 Years All Were The Claimants And Resp. No. 4-6 Were Represented Through Their Natural Gaurdian Mother Smt. Rambha Vaishnav, Wd/o Late Manohar Das, Aged About 24 Years, And All Were The Cast Vaishnav, R/o Village Kotiya, P.S. Narayanpur, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Minor Namita, D/o Late Manohar Das Aged About 3 Years All Were The Claimants And Resp. No. 4-6 Were Represented Through Their Natural Gaurdian Mother Smt. Rambha Vaishnav, Wd/o Late Manohar Das, Aged About 24 Years, And All Were The Cast Vaishnav, R/o Village Kotiya, P.S. Narayanpur, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents REKHA SINGH Digitally signed by REKHA SINGH -2- For Appellant : Mr. Hemant Gupta, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Arham Siddiqui, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 02.07.2025 1. Mr. Gupta, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant pleads no instruction. 2. Taking into consideration the submission made by Mr.Gupta, the present appeal is dismissed in want of instruction. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha