1 2026:CGHC:5862 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 344 of 2025 1 - Khoman Lal Sahu S/o Shri Kartik Ram Sahu Aged About 50 Years R/o Village - Navagaon (Budeni), Post - Bhendri, Tahsil - Magarlod, District - Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - Vijay Kumar Ruchdani Dead Through Lr. Wife Anita Ruchdani W/o Late Shri Vijay Kumar Ruchdani R/o House No.-76, Jal Vihar Colony, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Petitioner(s) : None. For Respondent(s) : None. (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput) Order on Board 02/02/2026 1. This writ petition was filed on 26.03.2025. It was initially listed on 17.04.2025, at which time certain defaults were pointed out by the Registry. The matter was made an exception by the Co-ordinate Bench. Thereafter, on 06.05.2025, the petitioner was granted three weeks’ time to argue the matter. On 30.06.2025, none appeared on behalf of the petitioner, however, a week time was granted to the petitioner to remove the defaults. When the matter was called twice today, no one appeared for the petitioner. Consequently, the record of the writ petition has been perused. 2. In this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 06.03.2025 (Annexure P-1), passed by the learned District Judge, Dhamtari, link Court kurud in Civil Execution Case No.11/2017. It has been further prayed in the writ petition for the stay of proceeding in the Civil Execution Case during the pendency of first appeal. From the record, it appears that an ex-parte decree for specific performance of 2 contract granted by the Additional District Judge, Dhamtari in respect of the suit property comprised in piece of Khasra Nos. 241, 352 area 0.24, 0.56 Hectare respectively in Civil Suit No.26A/ 2016. The decree in the said suit was passed on 04.11.2016. It appears that for execution of the said decree, the civil execution case was filed before the District Judge, Dhamtari link Court Kurud. An application under Section 151 of CPC was filed by the petitioner inter alia pleading that a first appeal against the ex-parte decree dated 04.11.2016 was preferred in the year 2025 before this Court and till same is decided, the proceeding of execution case may be stayed. By the impugend order, the learned District Judge dismissed the application filed under Section 151 of CPC observing that a stay order from the Hon’ble Court may be presented by the next date of hearing, otherwise further proceedings of execution case may be carried out. Challenging the same, this writ petition has been filed. On the last date of hearing i.e. 30.06.2025 and today as well, despite the case being called twice, none appeared on behalf of the petitioner. The petitioner, in sum and substance, is seeking a stay of execution. However, as per the pleadings, the appeal against the ex-parte decree was filed in the year 2025 after a lapse of about 9 years. 3. As no representation is made and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is left with no other option, but to dismiss the petition for want of prosecution. 4. Consequently, this petition is dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) JUDGE Parul PARUL MITTAL Digitally signed by PARUL MITTAL Date: 2026.02.06 17:17:55 +0530