Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 15]

Chattisgarh High Court

Kanhaiya Lal (Died) Through Legal ... vs Smt Rukhmani Bai 7 Mcrc/7472/2018 Amar ... on 8 October, 2018

Author: Prashant Kumar Mishra

Bench: Prashant Kumar Mishra

                                                                    NAFR

             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                         WPC No. 2785 of 2018

   1. Kanhaiya Lal (Died) Through Legal Representative,

      1a.   Madhuri Rani Saraf, W/o Late Kanhaiya Lal , Aged About
            63 Years

      1b.   Rakesh Saraf S/o Late Kanhaiya Lal Aged About 38 Years

      1c.   Rajeev Saraf S/o Late Kanhaiya Lal Aged About 36 Years

      1d.   Rina Saraf, D/o Late Kanhaiya Lal Aged About 43 Years

      1e.   Rajani Saraf , D/o Late Kanhaiya Lal Aged About 40 Years

      All are R/o Baloda Bazar, Tahsil And District Baloda Bazar -
      Bhatapara Chhattisgarh.

   2. Vijay Kumar S/o Late Shri Bhagwandin Saraf Aged About 60 Years
      R/o Baloda Bazar, Land Village Magarchaba Tahsil And District
      Baloda Bazar Chhattisgarh.

                                                            ---- Petitioner
                               Versus
   1. Smt Rukhmani Bai W/o Late Pradeep Kumar Agrawal

   2. Ku. Preeti Agrawal D/o Late Pradeep Kumar Agrawal

   3. Prashant Agrawal S/o Late Pradeep Kumar Agrawal

   4. Prasanna Kumar S/o Late Pradeep Kumar Agrawal

   5. Pramod Kumar S/o Mahendra Kumar Agrawal

   6. Prafull Kumar S/o Mahendra Kumar Agrawal

   7. Praveen Kumar S/o Mahendra Kumar Agrawal

      All are R/o Land Village Magarchaba, Tahsil And District Baloda
      Bazar Chhattisgarh.

                                                          ---- Respondent



For Petitioners              None


                            Order On Board

                                   By

                      Prashant Kumar Mishra, J.

08/10/2018

1) The matter was passed over once in absence of any representation on behalf of the petitioners. No one appears for the petitioners even in the second call.

2) In the circumstances, there is no other option left with the Court, but to dismiss the writ petition for want of prosecution.

3) Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.

Sd/-

Judge Prashant Kumar Mishra Gowri