Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 43625 (CHH)

VIJAY PILLE v. ANKIT PILLE

WP227/1051/2024 · 2025-09-08

Shri Rakesh Mohan Pandey

Public Interest Litigationbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:45988 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 1051 of 2024 * - Vijay Pille S/o Late Sudhir Pille Aged About 75 Years R/o Rajendra Nagar Chowk Bilaspur, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Defendant No. 3) ... Petitioner Versus 1 - Ankit Pille S/o Late Vinay Pille Aged About 30 Years R/o Rajendra Nagar Chowk Bilaspur, Tahsil And District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 2 - Amit Pille S/o Late Vinay Pille Aged About 26 Years R/o Rajendra Nagar Chowk Bilaspur, Tahsil And District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 3 - Nitani Pille W/o Late Vinay Pille Aged About 57 Years R/o Rajendra Nagar Chowk Bilaspur, Tahsil And District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 4 - Rajendra Pille S/o Late Sudhir Pille Aged About 65 Years R/o Rajendra Nagar Chowk Bilaspur, Tahsil And District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Defendant No. 1) 5 - Sanjay Pille S/o Late Sudhir Pille Aged About 58 Years R/o Rajendra Nagar Chowk Bilaspur, Tahsil And District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Defendant No. 2) 6 - Shashi Pille W/o Late Vinod Pille Aged About 58 Years R/o 46 Geetanjali Vihar, Nehru Nagar Bilaspur Tahsil And District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Defendant No. 4) 7 - Divyaraj Pille S/o Late Vinod Pille Aged About 29 Years R/o 46 Geetanjali Vihar, Nehru Nagar Bilaspur Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Defandant No. 5) 8 - Sauriyaraj Pille S/o Late Vinod Pille Aged About 30 Years R/o 46 Geetanjali Vihar, Nehru Nagar Bilaspur Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Defandant No. 6) ... Respondents For Petitioner : None appeared even in two rounds For Respondents : None Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI Date: 2025.09.11 13:52:16 +0530 2 Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 09/09/2025 1. The matter is called twice, no one appeared on behalf of the petitioner in the first round as well as in the second round. In these circumstances, this Court is left with no other option but to dismiss the petition for want of prosecution. 2. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti