Madhya Pradesh High Court
SA/1501/2019 of SALIM Vs VIKRAM SINGH on 2 February 2024
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMAON THE 2[nd] OF FEBRUARY, 2024
SECOND APPEAL No. 1501 of 2019
BETWEEN:-
SALIM S/O AJIJ KHAN, AGED 51 YEARS, OCCUPATION:KRISHI AND BUSINESS SARDAR CHIKEN CENTRE,OPPOSITE-IDGAH MASJID, DEWAS (MADHYAPRADESH)
(NONE FOR APPELLANT)
.....APPELLANT
AND
1.VIKRAM SINGH S/O DEVI SINGH BHEEL VILLAGE-KALUKHEDI, TEHSIL AND DISTT.-DEWAS,PRESENTLY VILLAGE-JAMGOD, TEHSIL ANDDISTT.-DEWAS (ORIGINAL PLAINTIFF)KALUKHEDI, TEHSIL AND DISTT.-DEWAS,PRESENTLY VILLAGE-JAMGOD, TEHSIL ANDDISTT.-DEWAS (ORIGINAL PLAINTIFF)
2.HAFIJ S/O AJIJ KHAN SARDAR CHIKEN CENTER,OPPOSITE IDGAH MASJID, DEWAS/MOMANTOLA(SHAMSHAN ROAD), DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)(ORIGINAL DEFENDANT NO.2)OPPOSITE IDGAH MASJID, DEWAS/MOMANTOLA(SHAMSHAN ROAD), DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)(ORIGINAL DEFENDANT NO.2)
3.AJIJ KHAN S/O HASAN KHAN (ORIGINALDEFENDANT NO.3) DECEASED THROUGH LRS :- (A) SARFARAZ KHAN S/O LATE AJIJKHANR/O MOMANTOLA (SHAMSHAN ROAD),DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)DEFENDANT NO.3) DECEASED THROUGH LRS :- (A) SARFARAZ KHAN S/O LATE AJIJKHANR/O MOMANTOLA (SHAMSHAN ROAD),DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)
(B)AYAJ KHAN S/O AJIJ KHAN (LATE ) R/O SUTARBAKHAL, DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)BAKHAL, DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)
(C)FIROZ KHAN S/O LATE AJIJ KHAN R/O 42,MUKTI MARG, DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)MUKTI MARG, DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)
(D)RASHID KHAN S/O LATE AJIJ KHAN 24, IDGAHROAD, DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)ROAD, DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)
4.THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGHCOLLECTOR, OFFICE OF THE COLLECTOR,DEWAS MP (ORIGINAL DEFENDANT NO.4) DEWASCOLLECTOR, OFFICE OF THE COLLECTOR,DEWAS MP (ORIGINAL DEFENDANT NO.4) DEWAS
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
This appeal coming on for admission this day, the court passed thefollowing:
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.
ORDER
On 8.11.2019 also none had appeared on behalf of appellant.
2. The non appearance of the appellant is sufficient to show that he isnot interested in prosecuting this appeal. Therefore, this second appeal isdismissed for want of prosecution.
3. Record of the courts below be returned back to the courts below with a copy of this order.
BDJ
(ANIL VERMA)JUDGE