[2025:RJ-JP:40727] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1284/2024 Krishanavtar Alias Narendrakumar Son Of Damodar, aged 48 years, Resident Of Khari Kothi Mohalla Takadi Ke Upar, Dausa, District Dausa. ----Appellant Versus 1. Satyanarayan Son Of Damodar, Resident Of Nai Mandi Road, Dausa District Dausa. 2. Jagdish Son Of Damodar, aged 54 years, Resident Of Aravali Vihar Colony Dausa District Dausa. 3. Rajendra Son Of Damodar, aged 50 years, R/o Khari Kothi Mohalla Dausa District Dausa. 4. Mukesh S/o Ramotar, Aged About 36 Years, (Deleted) 5. Hemant S/o Ramotar (Deleted), aged 40 years (Deleted) 6. Deepak S/o Ramotar, Aged About 38 Years R/o Behind Old Anaj Godown, New Mandi Road Dausa, Tehsil And District Dausa At Present R/o Adarsh Colony, Behind Prabhat Loan, Dausa Tehsil And District Dausa. 7. Bajrangsahai S/o Namaloom, Aged About 70 Years, R/o Khari Kothi, Mohalla Dausa 8. Satyanarayan S/o Namaloom, Aged About 50 Years, (Deleted) 9. Mohanlal S/o Namaloom, Aged About 52 Years, 10. Smt. Rajantidevi W/o Namaloom, Aged About 40 Years, 11. Jagdish, aged 52 years, R/o Jagatpura Jaipur. 12. Bajranglal S/o Namaloom, Aged About 60 Years, 13. Ajay S/o Namaloom, Aged About 50 Years, 14. Mahendra S/o Namaloom, Aged About 50 Years, 15. Girraj S/o Namaloom, Aged About 50 Years, 16. Kamlesh S/o Kalyanprasad, Aged About 50 Years, 17. Arjun S/o Namaloom, Aged About 45 Years, 18. Gaurishankar S/o Namaloom, aged 50 years (Deleted) R/o Vinayak Nagar, Dausa, District Dausa 19. Sureshchand S/o Govindram, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Jhupadiya Ke Dhani, Shyampura, Tehsil Bassi, District Jaipur 20. Nagar Parishad Dausa, District Dausa Through Commissioner Nagar Parishad Dausa. ----Respondents [2025:RJ-JP:40727] (2 of 2) [CMA-1284/2024] For Appellant(s) : None present For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ram Rakh Sharma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order 07/10/2025 1. The present civil miscellaneous appeal was listed on 25.09.2025 before a Co- ordinate Bench of this Court, but no one appeared on behalf of the appellant. Today again, no one has appeared on behalf of the appellant. 2. Matter has come up on an application (IA No. 1/2025) filed by the respondents for disposal of the present appeal as the original suit has been dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 03.02.2025 (Annexure - A/1). 3. Heard. 4. In view of the fact that the original suit was dismissed for want of prosecution on 03.02.2025, the present appeal filed under Order 43 Rules 1(R) of the CPC has been rendered infructuous. 5. The application (IA No. 1/2025) stands disposed of, and the present appeal is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. 6. However, the appellant is at liberty to file an application for revival of the writ petition if the original suit is restored or any cause of action still survives, subject to the law applicable. 7. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (MANEESH SHARMA),J Seema/129