RAMZAN KHAN v. MANGLA (DEAD), REPRESENTED BY HIS HIERS
SA/789/2019 · 2026-01-22
Shri Bibhu Datta Guru
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 753 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 753 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1
2026:CGHC:4162
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SA No. 789 of 2019 1 - Ramzan Khan S/o Nathu Khan Aged About 60 Years R/o Dhuma, Tahsil Kota, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Mahmud Khan S/o Arman Khan Aged About 32 Years R/o Dhuma, Tahsil Kota, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Gafoor Khan S/o Arman Khan Aged About 28 Years R/o Dhuma, Tahsil Kota, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Smt. Sakridan Wd/o Arman Khan Aged About 50 Years R/o Dhuma, Tahsil Kota, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Smt. Batul D/o Nathhu Khan Aged About 65 Years R/o Dhuma, Tahsil Kota, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
... Appellant(s) versus
1. Mangla (Dead), Represented By His Hiers Nil 1.(A) Manharan Sahu S/o Mangla Sahu Aged About 55 Years R/o Lamkena, Tahsil Kota, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 1.(B) Mannuram Sahu S/o Mangla Sahu Aged About 50 Years R/o Lamkena, Tahsil Kota, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 1.(C) Dilharan Sahu S/o Mangla Sahu Aged About 45 Years R/o Lamkena, Tahsil Kota, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector Of Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
... Respondent(s) JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2026.01.27 16:30:31 +0530
2 For Appellant(s) : None For Respondent/ State : Mr. Anand Gupta, Dy. G.A. Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 23/01/2026
1. On 22.03.2025 and 08.08.2025, no one appeared on behalf of the appellant to prosecute the matter. Today also on repeated calls no one is appearing, thus this Court is left with no other option but to dismiss the case for want of prosecution.
2. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/-
(Bibhu Datta Guru)
JUDGE Jyoti