Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 33664 (CHH)

BUDHARU DESHMUKH v. GAJANAND DEHARI

MAC/540/2022 · 2026-08-16

Shri Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 CGHC010116112022 2026:CGHC:36625 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 540 of 2022 1 - Budharu Deshmukh S/o Feru Deshmukh, R/o Village Birejhar, Post Pulgaon, Tehsil And District- Durg (C.G.) (Driver- Vehicle Truck No. MP 09 KA 0739). 2 - M/s Amar Builder Near Jainam Place, Mahesh Nagar Durg, District- Durg (C.G.) (Owner- Vehicle Truck No. MP 09 KA 0739). ... Appellants versus 1 - Gajanand Dehari S/o Late Darbariram, Aged About 50 Years, Caste- Halba, R/o Village And Post Bhandera, Tehsil Dondilohara, District- Balod (C.G.). 2 - Smt. Rajbai W/o Gajanand Dehari, Aged About 45 Years, Caste Halba, R/o Village And Post Bhandera, Tehsil Dondilohara, District- Balod (C.G.). 3 - United India Insurance Company Limited Divisional Manager, Division Office Tara Complex, G.E. Road, Bhilai, District- Durg (C.G.) (Insurer- Vehicle Truck No. MP 09 KA 0739). ... Respondent(s) For Appellants : None. For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Abhishek Vinod Deshmukh, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 17/08/2026 1. Today, none appears on behalf of the appellants when the case is called in the second round. Even on the last date of SOURABH PATEL Digitally signed by SOURABH PATEL Date: 2026.08.17 17:24:32 +0530 2 hearing, i.e., 07.08.2026, no one appeared nor was any representation made on behalf of the appellants. It appears that the appellants are not interested in prosecuting the present appeal. 2. In the absence of any representation on behalf of the appellants, this Court is left with no other option but to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. 3. Accordingly, the instant appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge $ourabh