Madhya Pradesh High Court
SA/2989/2019 of NARMADA PRASAD KRUMVANSHI Vs KEDAR PRASAD KRUMVANSHI on 8 January 2025
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DWARKA DHISH BANSAL
ON THE 5th OF DECEMBER, 2023
SECOND APPEAL No. 2989 of 2019
BETWEEN:-
NARMADA PRASAD KRUMVANSHI S/O BHAGWANDEEN
KRUMVANSHI,
AGED
ABOUT
YEARS, GRAM
ICHAULA TEHSIL UNCHEHARA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(NONE)
AND
1.
KEDAR
PRASAD
KRUMVANSHI
S/O
SHRI
BHAGWANDEEN KRUMVANSHI, AGED ABOUT 45
YEARS, GRAM ICHAULA TEHSIL UNCHEHARA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2.
RAJKUMAR
KRUMVANSHI
S/O
SHRI
BHAGWANDEEN KRUMVANSHI, AGED ABOUT 42
YEARS, GRAM ICHAULA TEHSIL UNCHEHARA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3.
CHHOTI
KRUMVANSHI
W/O
SHRI
BHAGWANDEEN KRUMVANSHI, AGED ABOUT 72
YEARS, GRAM ICHAULA TEHSIL UNCHEHARA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4.
VIDHYA
KRUMVANSHHI
W/O
GAVI
KRUMVANSHI,
AGED
ABOUT
YEARS,
HARDASPUR TEH. MAIHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
5.
RAJKUMARI KRUMVANSHI W/O UTTAM SINGH @
THANEDAR, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, VILLAGE
TIGRA KHURD TEH. MIHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
6.
MUNNI
KRUMVANSHI
W/O
GOVIND
KRUMVANSHI,
AGED
ABOUT
YEARS,
HARDASPUR TEH. MAIHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
7.
BHAGWATIDEEN KRUMVANSHI S/O SHRI BINDA
KRUMVANSHI,
AGED
ABOUT
YEARS,
SINHA
OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST VILLAGE ICHOLA
TEH. UNCHEHERA (MADHYA PRADESH)
8.
RAJENDRA PRASAD KRUMVANSHI S/O SHRI
BINDA KRUMVANSHI, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
VILLAGE ICHOLA TEH. UNCHEHERA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
9.
KUNJBIHARI KRUMVANSHI S/O SHRI BINDA
KRUMVANSHI,
AGED
ABOUT
YEARS,
OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST VILLAGE ICHOLA
TEH. UNCHEHERA (MADHYA PRADESH)
10.
PREMLAL
KRUMVANSHI
S/O
SHRI
BINDA
KRUMVANSHI,
AGED
ABOUT
Page 1 of 2
YEARS,
OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST VILLAGE ICHOLA
TEH. UNCHEHERA (MADHYA PRADESH)
11.
STATE OF M.P. THROUGH
COLLECTOR DISTT.
SATNA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI GOVIND PRASAD PATEL, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS 1-6)
This appeal coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:
ORDER
None for the appellant even in the second/passover round at 2:30 p.m.
2. Shri Govind Prasad Patel, Advocate for respondents 1-6.
3. It appears that the appellant has lost his interest in prosecuting this second appeal. Resultantly, this second appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution with cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rs. Five thousand only).
4. It is made clear that, if any application for restoration is filed, the deposition of cost of Rs.5,000/- with the High Court Bar Association, Jabalpur shall be a condition precedent to entertain the application for restoration, if any.
5. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand dismissed.
SINHA
(DWARKA DHISH BANSAL) JUDGE KPS
SINHA
Page 2 of 2
Loading citations and judicial treatment…