Vrihtakar Krushi Sakh Sahkari Samiti Maryadit v. Smt. Budhiyarin Bai (Deleted)
WPC/639/2017 · 2026-08-13
Shri Parth Prateem Sahu
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 31744 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 31744 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
-1-
CGHC010101442017
2026:CGHC:36424
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 639 of 2017 Vrihtakar Krushi Sakh Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Through Its Society Manager, Abhanpur, Registration No. 501, Tehsil- Abhanpur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh
... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Smt. Budhiyarin Bai (Deleted) As Per Honble Court Order Dated 04-07-2025. 2 - Shri Tomanlal S/o Late Shri Lakhanlal Satnami R/o Modeltown, Jhuggi Jhopdi Mohalla, Nehru Nagar, Bhilai, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh 3 - Smt. Devki Bai D/o Late Shri Lakhanlal Satnami R/o Village- Sejbahar, P.S.- Tikrapara, Tehsil And District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Smt. Shakun Bai D/o Late Shri Lakhanlal Satnami R/o Telibandha, Raipur, Tehsil And District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Smt. Kumari D/o Late Shri Lakhanlal Satnami W/o Shri Madhavdas Gadi, R/o Adda Mata Para, Kolkata West Bengal Through Power Of Attorney Rajkumar And Samaru Satnami, S/o Late Shri Lakhanlal, R/o Village- Lamkeni, Tehsil- Abhanpur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh 6 - Shri Rajkumar S/o Late Shri Lakhanlal R/o Village- Lamkeni, Tehsil- Abhanpur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh 7 - Samaru Satnami S/o Late Shri Lakhanlal R/o Village- Lamkeni, Tehsil- Abhanpur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh 8 - Jila Sahkari Kendriya Bank Branch- Abhanpur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh
... Respondent(s) Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR SINHA Date: 2026.08.17 10:59:19 +0530
-2- For Petitioner : None appears For Resp. No. 2 to 7 : Mr. Pritam Singh, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Aman Sharma, Advocate S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order On Board 14/08/2026
1. This case is listed in final hearing list and called up for hearing continuously in this week. However, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner even on multiple calls.
2. In the aforementioned facts of the case, this Court is left with no option but to dismiss the writ petition for want of prosecution.
3. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/----/-/- Sd/-- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Praveen