1 2025:CGHC:50190 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SA No. 483 of 2013 1 - Laxmi Prasad S/o Ghasiya Ram Kahara Aged About 52 Years 2 - Ram Kripale S/o Laxmi Prasad Kahara Aged About 26 Years Both are R/o Purgaw, Tah. Bilaigarh, Distt. Raipur Now Civil And Revenue Distt. Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara C.G. --- Appellants versus 1 - Ghasiya Ram S/o Jhunau Kahara Aged About 71 Years 2 - Ramnarayan S/o Ghasiya Kahara Aged About 41 Years 3 - Krishna Kumar S/o Ram Narayan Kahara Aged About 21 Years 4 - Gopal Prasad S/o Ram Narayan Kahara Aged About 20 Years No.1 to 4 all are R/o Purgaw, Tah. Bilaigarh, Distt. Raipur Now Civil And Revenue Distt. Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara C.G. 5 - State Of Chhattisgarh S/o Thru- The Collector, Raipur Now Collector, Revenue And Civil Distt. Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara C.G. 6 - Mukund Ram Kalar S/o Ramlal Aged About 48 Years R/o Purgaw, Tah. Bilaigarh, Distt. Raipur Now Civil And Revenue Distt. Baloda Bazar- Bhatapara C.G. --- Respondents For Appellants : None for appellants For Respondent-State : Mr. Kishan Lal Sahu, Dy.G.A. SB: Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board 08/10/2025 1. There was no representation on behalf of appellants on 17.07.2025. This Court issue fixed date SPC for appearance of appellants, thereafter, the case was listed on 18.09.2025 and again no one appeared on behalf of appellants or the private respondents. Case was adjourned for listing in the month of October, 2025. Today also BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Digitally signed by BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Date: 2025.10.09 11:03:04 +0530 2 there is no representation on behalf of appellants or private respondents. 2. Perusal of the office report would show that SPC sent to appellants on their address as mentioned in the cause title of appeal, is returned unserved with a note that they are not residing in given address but as per information gathered they are residing at Shivrinarayan, Janjgir- Champa. There is no address of appellants of their change of place of residence. 3. In the aforementioned facts of the case, this Court is left with no other option but to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Balram