IN THE HIGH COURT 0£_CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.C.C. N0. fLK; APPLICANT .JV ^•"'A''; .••' ^M^ -^$?f '^"^ 7V /^s\y ..•• ~^s\y /^ />^ / .^/ <y ^ . / <?w K; OF2°05. SIHGLE BEliCH yideshi, S/o Bhimbha Rawat, aged about 50 years, Occupation- Agriculture, R/o Village-Kenwachhi, Tahsil Bemetara, Distt-Durg (C.G.) VERSUS NON-APPLICANTS :1 ^ 3. Nirmala Bai, W/o Jagau Rawat, aged about 30 years, Occupation- Agriculture, R/o Village-Dholiya. Santoshi Bai, S/o Bhuneshwar Rawat, aged about 27 years, Occupation-Agriculture R/o Village- Ninwa, Both Tahsil-Bemetara, Distt- Durg (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh, Through: The Collector, Durg, Distt- Durg (C.G.) APPLIATION FOR RESTORATION OF S.A. N0.^200 / 2005. UNDERORDER A1 RULE 19 OF C.P.C. XI-HC-22 311^1 ^iT h-u* sn^i 5^^\<^ yfsei padma Tsg'^n'n^R. ^•dl'y'TS,-i°t«i'Mi< i<-^ Tp-R'ff g^tira; r.c...l(± \3 i" sii^i ^giWHfeg 18.04.2006 None for theapplicant. Shri Sanjay S Agrawal, Shri Akhil Agrawal, couns41 Once the case has been but for want of prosecution on over. Now, the case has been the appiicant, hence the case is the applicant. cojjnsel for respondents NO.I& 2. for respondents No.3. c^lled out during the course of the day, (?ehalf.of the applicant, it was passed ttil^ifl-'fl'T HJt^h' ^ f^1^ <F^T^I< 'E& aipgii sn^t (jalled out again, but none appears for dismissed for want of appearoncs of Sd/- V.K.Shrivastava Judge