(2025:JHHC:38724) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Second Appeal No. 189 of 2003 1 Rajoni Khakha 2 Bimal Khakha both sons of Late Pritam Khakha 3 Manohar Khakha 4 Sohan Khakha 5 Sushil Khakha son of late Barnabas Khakha 6 Mohan Khakha 7 Mukut Khakha 8 Ralis Khakha son of Buni Khakha 9 Tajmani Khakha widow of Jhasman Khakha 10 Chama Khakha alias Ohma 11 Gyan Khakha son of Jasman Khakha 12 Abha Khakha widow of Lolal Khakha 13 Pritam Khakha son of Lolal Khakha 14 Somal Khakha son of Khela Khakha All residents of village-Kachmachi, P.S. Bhandra, P.O. Bhitha, District-Lohardaga … … … … Plaintiffs/Appellants Versus 1. Naimi Orain widow of Manga Oraon 2. Sushil Oraon son of late Manga Oraon 3. Ranka Oraon, son of late Chaparu Oraon, resident of village- Kachmachi, P.S. Bhandra, P.S. Bhitha, District- Lohardaga … … Defendants/Respondents 4. Deputy Commissioner, Lohardaga … … Proforma Defendant/Respondent --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Appellants : None For the Respondents : Mr. Aditya Banerjeee, Advocate --- 30/23.12.2025 Nobody appears on behalf of the appellants 2. This appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 31st January, 2003 (decree signed on 15.02.2003) passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Lohardaga in Title Appeal No. 70 of 1994 whereby the appeal has been dismissed and the judgment and decree dated 16th April, 1994 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Lohardaga in T.S. No. 253 of 1986 has been affirmed. 3. On 10.09.2025, when the matter was taken up, on that day also, nobody had appeared. The case was earlier adjourned from time to time and twice adjournment was granted on payment of cost of Rs. (2025:JHHC:38724) 2 1,000/- and Rs. 2,000/- vide order dated 08.07.2024 and 12.11.2024 respectively. 4. The learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that the proceeding has abated in connection with respondent nos. 2 and 3 as recorded in order dated 10.09.2025. He submits that apparently the appellants are not interested in pursuing this case. 5. Considering the aforesaid submissions and having gone through the previous orders passed by this court, it seems that the appellants are not interested in pursuing this case. No advance notice seeking adjournment has been circulated and the learned counsel for the appellants is absent. 6. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. 7. Pending I.A., if any, is closed. 8. Let this order be communicated to the court concerned through FAX. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Dated: 23/12/2025 Uploaded on: 13/01/2026 Binit