1 CGHC010151452020 2026:CGHC:33061 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1584 of 2020 1 - Ramprasad Gupta S/o Pramod Gupta Aged About 82 Years R/o Belgahna, Tahsil - Kota, District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Durga Prasad S/o Late Chhedilal Gupta R/o Katghora, Tahsil - Katghora, District - Korba Chhattisgarh., District : Korba, Chhattisgarh 2 - Motilal S/o Late Chhedilal Gupta R/o Belgahna, Tahsil- Kota, District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Gulaba Bai W/o Ramprasad Gupta 4 - Sunil Gupta S/o Ganesh Gupta 5 - Anil Gupta S/o Ganesh Gupta 6 - Deepak Gupta S/o Ganesh Gupta 7 - Shriram Gupta S/o Ganesh Gupta 8 - Sushila Gupta D/o Ganesh Gupta 9 - Anita Gupta D/o Ganesh Gupta No.3 to 9 are R/o Village - Belgahna, Tahsil - Kota, District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 10 - Sunita Gupta D/o Ganesh Gupta R/o Shahdol, Tahsil - Sohagpur, District - Shahdol (M.P.), District : Shahdol, Madhya Pradesh 11 - Sarita Gupta D/o Ganesh Gupta R/o Champa, Tahsil - Champa, District - Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 12 - Arti Gupta D/o Ganesh Gupta 13 - Kantilal Gupta S/o Chhedilal Gupta No.12 and 13 are R/o Village - Lormi, Tahsil - Lormi, District - Mungeli Chhattisgarh., Chhattisgarh 14 - Janki Gupta W/o Late Chhedilal Gupta R/o Pendra, Tahsil - Pendra, District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Digitally signed by BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN 2 --- Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from CIS system) For Petitioner : None present. For Respondents/State : Ms. Shailja Shukla, G.A. For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Shailendra Bajpai, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board 30/07/2026 1. None appeared on behalf of petitioner in the first round and the case was passed over. When the case is taken up for hearing in the second round again there is no representation on behalf of petitioner. 2. The case was earlier listed on 15.06.2026 on that date also no one appeared on behalf of petitioner. 3. In the aforementioned facts of the cases, this Court is left with no other option but to dismiss the writ petition for want of prosecution. 4. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Balram