Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 6716 (RAJ)

TEJA RAM v. RAMDEVA AND ORS

CSA/42/2001 · 2025-03-05

Ashok Kumar Jain

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:9910] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 42/2001 Teja Ram S/o Jaggu Ram, Dhani Munka Wali, Tan Bagora, Teh. Udaipurwati, Distt. Jhunjhunu ----Appellant Versus 1. Ramdeva S/o Dayala Ram, aged about 42 years, Dhani Munkawali, Tan Bagora, Teh. Udaipurwati, Distt. Jhunjhunu 2. Fata S/o Dayala Ram, aged about 58 years, Dhani Munkawali, Tan Bagora, Teh. Udaipurwati, Distt. Jhunjhunu 3. Birbal S/o Fata Ram, aged about 38 years, Dhani Munkawali, Tan Bagora, Teh. Udaipurwati, Distt. Jhunjhunu 4. Rameshwar S/o Fata Ram, aged about 34 Dhani Munkawali, Tan Bagora, Teh. Udaipurwati, Distt. Jhunjhunu 5. Madan Ram S/o Fata Ram, aged about 36 years, Dhani Munkawali, Tan Bagora, Teh. Udaipurwati, Distt. Jhunjhunu 6. Mohan S/o Harlal, aged about 42 years, Dhani Munkawali, Tan Bagora, Teh. Udaipurwati, Distt. Jhunjhunu 7. Narsa Ram S/o Bodu Ram, aged about 34 years, Dhani Munkawali, Tan Bagora, Teh. Udaipurwati, Distt. Jhunjhunu 8. Bhagwana S/o Birdaram, aged about 57 years, Dhani Munkawali, Tan Bagora, Teh. Udaipurwati, Distt. Jhunjhunu ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : None For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order [2025:RJ-JP:9910] (2 of 2) [CSA-42/2001] 05/03/2025 1. None present for the appellant. 2. It appears that appellant has lost the interest in pursing the matter. 3. Hence, S.B. Civil Second Appeal is dismissed for non- prosecution. 4. Misc. application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J GAURAV /23