1 CGHC010153582013 2026:CGHC:40682 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SA No. 491 of 2013 1 - Ramprasad (Died) Through LRs. 1.(A). Smt. Malti Patel, W/o. Late Ramprasad, Aged About 65 Years, R/o. Village Barbhatha, P.S. And Tahsil Sarangarh, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. 1.(B). Smt. Somlata. D/o. Late Ramprasad, Aged About 40 Years, R/o. Nawagarh, Tahsil And P.S. Saraipali, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. 1.(C). Harishankar Patel, S/o. Late Ramprasad, Aged About 32 Years, R/o. Village Barbhatha, P.S. And Tahsil Sarangarh, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. 2 – Ramlal, S/o. Dhaniram Patel, Aged About 52 Years, Caste Aghariya, Occupation Agriculturist, R/o. Barbhatha, P.S. And Tahsil Sarangarh, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants versus 1- Buthalu Dansena (Died) Through Legal Heirs- ASHOK SAHU Digitally signed by ASHOK SAHU Date: 2026.09.17 17:10:50 +0530 2 1.1 - Smt. Kapil Bai Jaiswal, D/o. Late Buthalu, W/o. Durga Prasad Jaiswal, Aged About 60 Years, R/o. Village Pail Para Kumhar Mohalla, Tahsil And District Sarangarh,- Bilaigarh, Chhattisgarh. 1.2 - Smt. Rohani Izardar, W/o. Sanjay Kumar Izardar, Aged About 42 Years, R/o. Village Hostal Para Baramkela, P.S. Baramkela, District Sarangarh- Bilaigarh, Chhattisgarh 1.3 - Vishnu Jaiswal, S/o. Late Ashok Jaiswal, Aged About 40 Years, R/o. Village Pail Para Kumhar Mohalla, Tahsil And District Sarangarh- Bilaigarh, Chhattisgarh 1.4 - Rohit Jaiswal, S/o. Late Ashok Jaiswal, Aged About 38 Years, R/o. Village Pail Para Kumhar Mohalla, Tahsil And District Sarangarh- Bilaigarh, Chhattisgarh 2 - The State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Collector, Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Appellants : None appeared. For Respondent No.1 : Mr. Abhishek Mishra, Advocate For Respondent No.2 : Mrs. Shubha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer (Single Bench) Hon'ble Smt. Justice Sushma Sawant Order on Board 3 17.09.2026 1. This second appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment & decree dated 16.12.2011 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sarangarh, District Raigarh in Civil Appeal No.1-A/2011. 2. Earlier on 07.08.2026, none appeared on behalf of the appellants and even today also, when the matter is called for hearing twice, none appeared nor any representation is made on behalf of the appellants; therefore, this Court has no other option except to dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. 3. Accordingly, this second appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/- (Sushma Sawant) Judge Ashok