Chhattisgarh High Court
WP227/986/2025 of SWARAJ BAGHEL Vs SMT. MANORAMA BAGHEL on 8 October 2026
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 986 of 2025 1 - Swaraj Baghel S/o Late Shri Banshilal Baghel Aged About 78 Years R/o Village Belodi, Tehsil Patan, District Durg C.G. (Plaintiff No. 1) 2 - Azad Baghel S/o Late Shri Banshilal Baghel Aged About 76 Years R/o Village
CGHC010407592025
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WP227 No. 986 of 2025
1 - Swaraj Baghel S/o Late Shri Banshilal Baghel Aged About 78 Years R/o Village Belodi, Tehsil Patan, District Durg C.G. (Plaintiff No. 1)
2 - Azad Baghel S/o Late Shri Banshilal Baghel Aged About 76 Years R/o Village Belodi, Tehsil Patan, District Durg C.G. (Plaintiff No. 2)
3 - Yuvraj Baghel S/o Late Shri Ramkrishna Baghel Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Belodi, Tehsil Patan, District Durg C.G. (Plaintiff No. 3)
4 - Anil Kumar S/o Late Shri Mahesh Ram Baghel Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Belodi, Tehsil Patan, District Durg C.G. (Plaintiff No. 4)
... Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - Smt. Manorama Baghel W/o Late Shri Prahlad Baghel Aged About 73
Years R/o 43/833 Hanuman Nagar, Near Goswami Kirana Stores, Post Sundernagar, Tehsil And District Raipur C.G.(Defendant No. 1)
2 - Shri Bhupendra Singh, Naib Tehsildar, Patan, District Durg C.G.M
(Defendant No. 2)
3 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, District Durg C.G.
... Respondent(s)
(Cause title taken from CIS)
For Petitioner(s)
: Mr. Harshmander Rastogi, Advocate
For Respondent No.1
For State
:
:
Ms. Poonam Gilurkar, Advocate
Mr. Atanu Ghosh, Dy. G.A.
Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J
Order on Board
09.10.2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the civil suit pending before the learned trial Court has been withdraw by the petitioner and fresh civil suit has been filed. Therefore, the present writ petition which has been arising out of the earlier suit is now become infructuous.
2. In view of the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioners, which is not opposed by the learned counsel for the respective respondents, the present writ petition is disposed of as having become infructous. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge sagrika