← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWP227/164/2013dismissed

Smt.Mamta Singh And ANR. v. Smt.Dharma Devi And ORS.

2018-12-11Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal3 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (227) No. 151 of 2013 1.

Smt. Mamta Singh, Wife of Late Shri Dayashankar Singh, aged about 24 years, Resident of Quarter No.137/6/A, Balco Nagar, Korba (C.G.) 2.

Rahul Singh, aged about 7 months, son of Late Shri Dayashankar Singh, Legal Guardian Smt. Mamta Singh, Both resident of Quarter No. 137/6/A, Balco Nagar, Korba, Distirct - Korba (C.G.) ----Petitioners

Versus

1.

Ramesh Kumar Mishra, aged about 27 years, Son of Ramlhitkari Mishra, Quarter No. 355, Sector 3/A, Balco Nagar, Korba, District Korba (C.G.) 2.

National Insurance Company Limited - Through- Branch Manager, Minu Complex Kosabadi, Korba, District - Korba (C.G.) 3.

Kailash Nath Singh, aged about 54 years, Son of Dayashankar Singh, son of Yadunandan Singh 4.

Smt. Dharmadevi, aged about 48 years, Wife of Kailash Nath Singh, Both Resident of Quarter No. 281/3/A, Balco Nagar, Korba, District Korba (C.G.) ---- Respondents Writ Petition (227) No. 164 of 2013 1.

Smt. Mamta Singh, Wife of Late Shri Dayashankar Singh, aged about 24 years, Resident of Quarter No.137/6/A, Balco Nagar, Korba (C.G.) 2.

Rahul Singh, aged about 7 months, son of Late Shri Dayashankar Singh, Legal Guardian Smt. Mamta Singh, Both resident of Quarter No. 137/6/A, Balco Nagr, Korba, Distirct - Korba (C.G.) ----Petitioners

Versus

1.

Smt. Dharma Devi, W/o Kailashnath Singh, aged about 50 years, 2.

Kailashnath Singh, Son of Yadunath Singh, Both Resident of 281 Sector 3 Balco, District - Korba (C.G.) 4.

Aam Janta (who related)

---- Respondents For Petitioners : None For Respondent : None Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 11/12/2018 (1) Even after the mater was called out for hearing in the second round, none appeared on behalf of the petitioners, therefore, in these circumstances, this court has no other option but to dismiss the writ petitions for want of prosecution. (2) Accordingly, the writ petitions are dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge D/-