Chhattisgarh High Court
WP227/230/2022 of NAROTTAM GUPTA Vs BABU SINGH on 7 October 2026
2026:CGHC:43762 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 230 of 2022 1 - Narottam Gupta S/o Premlal, Aged About 55 Years Caste Bani, R/o Village Majhagawa, P.S. Pendra, Tahsil Marwahi, Distt. Gaourella- Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Babu Singh S/o Dhan
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.
CGHC010137592022
2026:CGHC:43762
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 230 of 2022 1 - Narottam Gupta S/o Premlal, Aged About 55 Years Caste Bani, R/o Village Majhagawa, P.S. Pendra, Tahsil Marwahi, Distt. Gaourella- Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.)
... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Babu Singh S/o Dhan Singh, Aged About 50 Years Caste Gond, R/o Village Majhagawa, P.S. Pendra, Tahsil Marwahi, Distt. Gaourella-
2 - Bundkunwar, D/o Dhansingh Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Amaru, P.S. Pendra, Tahsil Marwahi, Distt. Gaourella-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) 3 - Baby D/o Dhan Singh Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Kolbirra, P.S. Pendra, Tahsil Marwahi, Distt. Gaourella-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) 4 - Benkunwar D/o Shanker Singh (Mother Late Seema) Caste Gond, R/o Village Sarkhor, P.S. Pendra, Tahsil Marwahi, Distt. Gaourella-
5 - Manoj Kumar Gupta, Aged About 50 Years Caste Bani, R/o Village Majhagawa, P.S. Pendra, Tahsil Marwahi, Distt. Gaourella-Pendra- Marwahi (C.G.) 6 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, Distt. Gaourella-Pendra- Marwahi (C.G.)
... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : None present. For Respondent No.1 to 5 : Mr. Dhirendra Prasad Mishra, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Manish Kashyap, PL
(Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Order on Board 08/10/2026 Since none appears on behalf of the petitioner and no representation is made on his behalf even on repeated calls, this Court has no option but to dismiss the petition for want of prosecution. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge