1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CR No. 249 of 2025 1 - Aangan Bai Wd/o Late Shyamlal Aged About 78 Years Caste- Satnami, R/o Village Kapupahri, Post Tuman, Tahsil Kartala, District Korba C.G. 2 - Awadhram S/o Late Shyamlal Aged About 51 Years Caste- Satnami, R/o Village Kapupahri, Post Tuman, Tahsil Kartala, District Korba C.G. ... Applicant versus 1 - Aajuram S/o Late Bhagatram Aged About 63 Years Caste - Satnami, R/o Village Kapupahri, Post Tuman, Tahsil Kartala, District Korba C.G. 2 - Ghasnin Bai D/o Late Bhagatram Aged About 60 Years Caste - Satnami, R/o Village Kapupahri, Post Tuman, Tahsil Kartala, District Korba C.G. 3 - Natthuram S/o Late Bhagatram Aged About 58 Years Caste - Satnami, R/o Village Kapupahri, Post Tuman, Tahsil Kartala, District Korba C.G. 4 - Chhatturam S/o Late Bhagatram Aged About 53 Years Caste - Satnami, R/o Village Kapupahri, Post Tuman, Tahsil Kartala, District Korba C.G. 5 - Prembai D/o Late Bhagatram Aged About 50 Years Caste - Satnami, R/o Village Kapupahri, Post Tuman, Tahsil Kartala, District Korba C.G. 6 - Premlal S/o Late Bhagatram Aged About 47 Years Caste - Satnami, R/o Village Kapupahri, Post Tuman, Tahsil Kartala, District Korba C.G. 7 - Pawarabai D/o Late Ramnath Aged About 55 Years Caste - Satnami, R/o Village Kapupahri, Post Tuman, Tahsil Kartala, District Korba C.G. 8 - Narbadiya Bai D/o Late Ramnath Aged About 51 Years Caste - Satnami, R/o Village Kapupahri, Post Tuman, Tahsil Kartala, District Korba C.G. 9 - Sarbadiya Bai D/o Late Ramnath Aged About 37 Years Caste - Satnami, R/o Village Kapupahri, Post Tuman, Tahsil Kartala, District Korba C.G. 10 - Manjulata D/o Late Ramnath Aged About 26 Years Caste - Satnami, R/o Village Kapupahri, Post Tuman, Tahsil Kartala, District Korba C.G. 11 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, District Korba C.G. ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title is taken from Case Information System) Digitally signed by SHAYNA KADRI 2 For Petitioner : None For State : Mr. Ajay Pandey, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Order on Board 14/10/2025 1. There is no appearance on behalf of the petitioner even when the matter is taken up for hearing twice. 2. In view of the above, this Court is left with no other option but to dismiss this revision for want of prosecution. 3. Accordingly, this revision is dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Shayna