Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1
2025:CGHC:53867
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SA No. 498 of 2013 1 - Jogiram S/o Late Sadhuram Aged About 48 Years R/o Arsiya, At Present R/o Padahardi, Tahsil And P.S. Jaijaipur, Distt. Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh
... Appellants(s) versus 1 - Janki Bai D/o Late Pilwa Aged About 70 Years Wd/o Darogaprasad Chandra, At Present R/o House Of Lahariya Satnami, Pirahid, Tahsil And P.S. Malkharauda, Distt. Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 2 - Netram S/o Late Jhaduram Chandra Aged About 41 Years R/o Arsiya, Tahsil And P.S. Jaijaipur, Civil And Revenue District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 3 - Ambika Bai D/o Late Jhaduram Chandra Aged About 56 Years R/o Arsiya, Tahsil And P.S. Jaijaipur, Civil And Revenue District : Janjgir- Champa, Chhattisgarh 4 - Ratthuram S/o Late Jhaduram Chandra Aged About 51 Years R/o Arsiya, Tahsil And P.S. Jaijaipur, Civil And Revenue District : Janjgir- Champa, Chhattisgarh 5 - Tekram S/o Late Jhaduram Chandra Aged About 48 Years R/o Arsiya, Tahsil And P.S. Jaijaipur, Civil And Revenue District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 6 - Sukdevi D/o Pilwa Aged About 81 Years R/o Arsiya, Tahsil And P.S. Jaijaipur, Civil And Revenue District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 7 - The State Of Chhattisgarh, Through- Collector, Janjgir, Civil And Revenue District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Appellant(s) : None For Respondent No.7/State : Mr. Kalpesh Ruparel, Panel Lawyer VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2025.11.04 19:24:28 +0530
2 Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 04/11/2025
1. It transpires from the order sheets that, on 01.01.2014, no one appears on behalf of the appellant. On 22.03.2023, 27.06.2025 and 22.08.2025 also, no one appears on behalf of the appellant and a fixed date SPC was issued to the appellant for today. The SPC issued to the appellant has been served upon him on 06.09.2025, however, no representation is made on his behalf despite repeated calls.
2. Accordingly, the present second appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge ved