Patna High CourtCWJC/10919/1995dfd for non appearance

Pratham Lal Singh v. State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-03-13Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10919 of 1995 ====================================================== Pratham Lal Singh, son of Late Brahran Lal, resident of village- Megha Asaraha, P.S.- Kursi Kamta, District- Araria. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Araria.

3. The Anchal Adhikari, Kursi Kamta Anchal, District- Araria.

4. Abhay Kumar Sancheti.

5. Ishwar Chandra Sancheti, both sons of Late Govind Ram Sancheta and resident of village- PATEGNA KAMAT, P.s.- Taraban, District- Araria. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== with Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10918 of 1995 ====================================================== Anand Lal Singh, son of Late Kumbh Lal Sah, village - AsrahaKhalan Khola, P.S.- Kursi Kata, District- Araria.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Araria.

3. The Anchal Adhikari, Kursi Kalan Anchal, District- Araria.

4. Abhay Kumar Sancheti.

5. Ishwar Chandra Sancheti, both are sons of Late Govind Ram Sancheta and resident of village- PATEGNA KAMAT, P.S.- Taraban, DistrictAraria. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

(In CWJC No.10919 of 1995) For the Petitioner/s : None For the Respondent/s :

(In CWJC No.10918 of 1995) For the Petitioner/s : None For the Respondent/s :

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 13-03-2018 Nobody appears on behalf of the petitioners.

Learned counsel for the respondent nos.4 and 5 appeared and submitted that he has already sold his lands to

Patna High Court CWJC No.10919 of 1995 (6) dt.13-03-2018 2/2 Mulchand Golcha. It is further submitted that the petitioner Pratham Lal Singh died 4-5 years ago but no substitution petition is filed.

Even today on repeated call, nobody appears on behalf of the petitioners.

Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, both the writ petitions are dismissed for non-prosecution. (Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) N.H./- U