Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 7214 (CHH)

Ramavtar Soni v. Amanulla

FA/34/2016 · 2026-04-16

Shri Bibhu Datta Guru

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:17560 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR FA No. 34 of 2016 Ramavtar Soni S/o Keshardev Soni, Aged About 62 Years R/o Subhash Ward, Mungeli, Tahsil And District- Mungeli, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s) versus 1. Amanulla S/o Abdul Sattar, Aged About 52 Years R/o Subhash Ward, Mungeli, Tahsil And District- Mungeli, Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh 2. Murtuja Khan S/o Abdul Sattar, Aged About 65 Years R/o Subhash Ward, Mungeli, Tahsil And District- Mungeli, Chhattisgarh, District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh 3. Abdul Ajeej S/o Abdul Sattar, Aged About 58 Years R/o Subhash Ward, Mungeli, Tahsil And District- Mungeli, Chhattisgarh, District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh 4. Abdul Kadir S/o Abdul Sattar, Aged About 68 Years R/o Subhash Ward, Mungeli, Tahsil And District- Mungeli, Chhattisgarh, District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh 5. Abdul Rahman S/o Abdul Sattar, Aged About 50 Years R/o Subhash Ward, Mungeli, Tahsil And District- Mungeli, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from CIS) For Appellant : Mr. S.S. Barik, Advocate For Respondent No. 1, 3 & 5 : Mr. R.L. Rajak, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Atul Kumar Kesharwani, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board 17.04.2026 JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2026.04.17 17:17:57 +0530 2 1. Today the appeal is listed for non-compliance of order dated 20.01.2026, however, learned counsel for the appellant appears and submits that he has no instruction from the appellant. 2. In view of the above, the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/- SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Jyoti