Chhattisgarh High Court
SA/465/2019 of NEM SINGH Vs SMT. KRISHNA BAI on 15 October 2026
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SA No. 465 of 2019 1 - Nem Singh S/o Chatur Ram Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Khartuli, Tahsil And District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh., District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh 2 - Roop Ram S/o Chatur Ram Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Khartuli, Tahsil
CGHC010167872019
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
SA No. 465 of 2019
1 - Nem Singh S/o Chatur Ram Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Khartuli,
Tahsil And District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh., District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh
2 - Roop Ram S/o Chatur Ram Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Khartuli, Tahsil And District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh. (Plaintiffs), District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh
... Appellants
Versus
1 - Smt. Krishna Bai W/o Sukhram Aged About 68 Years R/o Village Khartuli,
Page 1 of 4
2 - Premprakash S/o Chatur Ram Aged About 6 Years Minor Through Legal Guardian Chatur Ram, R/o Village Potiyadih, Tahsil And District Dhamtari
Chhattisgarh.,
District
:
Dhamtari,
Chhattisgarh
3 - Karan Kumar S/o Chatur Ram Aged About 5 Years Minor Through Legal Guardian Chatur Ram, R/o Village Potiyadih, Tahsil And District Dhamtari
Chhattisgarh.,
District
:
Dhamtari,
Chhattisgarh
4 - Chatur Ram S/o Sukh Ram Aged About 47 Years R/o Village Khartuli,
Page 2 of 4
5 - Sukh Ram S/o Late Milau Aged About 72 Years R/o Village Khartuli, Tahsil And District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh., District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh 6 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari
Chhattisgarh.,
District
:
Dhamtari,
Chhattisgarh
7 - Smt. Binda Bai W/o Chatur Ram Sahu, R/o Village Khartuli, Tahsil And District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh., District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh
... Respondent(s)
Page 3 of 4
For Petitioner(s)
:
None.
For Respondent(s) :
Mr. Santosh Kumar Soni, G.A.
HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE SACHIN SINGH RAJPUT
Order on Board
16/10/2026
1. None appeared on behalf of the appellant despite the matter being called twice.
2. This appeal was filed in the year 2019.
3. On 05.07.2019, the Registry pointed out certain defects in the appeal. Accordingly, this Court granted four weeks' time to learned counsel for the appellant to rectify the defects.
4. It appears that the defects pointed out by the Registry have not yet been cured, and no one has appeared on behalf of the appellant today.
5. In view of the above, the second appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution and for non-compliance with the order of this Court. Sd/-
(Sachin Singh Rajput)
JUDGE Saurabh
Page 4 of 4
Loading citations and judicial treatment…