Bjjl^jl^^jg^^^^^ -s.:- ~^ \ L<' \ e IN THE HIGH COURTOF JUDieATUREATBULASPURlC.G,) M.C.C.No. f/ /2005 APPUCANTS: ^ 'oC .^ ^1.1.^ -.-•s- ^•^SSi^-^S^ ^y"ii^-:" d^;e':A;...^"®?>'': ^; - ^ssu;r^-g7":"!:'~'"": -' 'i^^^: NOI^APPUCANTS: iro (since deceased) His legal Keirs are 1) Gorango, S/o Fakiro, Aged about 54 years. 2J Janakram, S/o Fakiro, Ageid about 51 years. .) Saligram, S/o Pakiro, Aged abouf 41 years. 4)yKartikram, S/0 Fakiro, Aged about 47 years. y^^Applicant&Nrt 1 to 41R/0 Village: Pokdega, PS&Tehsil: Lailunga, DistrictRaigarh (C.G.) - i Laxmibai, D/o Fakiro, W/Q Purno, Aged about 60 years, R/o Village: Hoi-Qguna^l'ehsil; , Lailynga, Distriet: Raigarh (C.G.) ^^Gpliolabai, D/o.Fakiro, W/p Fakiro, Aged about 57 years, R/o ViUage: Tendudih, PS & Tehsil: Huigir, District: SundargarK(Orissa). '^'Supobai, D/o T'akiro, W/o Sagaro Pradhan, Aged about37.years, R/pVillage: Lamdad, Tehsil: Laihihga., Distriet: Raigarh (C.G.) Rajkumari Bai, D/o Fakiro, Age(labout;33tyears,R/oyi]lage: Sharamdega, TeBsil: L.ailunga, District: Raigarh (C;G.) Vs.' . :. . ; : :- ^A-) Jalsay, S/o Sanjhu Nagvanshi, Aged about 40 years. ^.Motu-am, S/o Lodhi Nagwanshi, Aged about 42 years. S^^ero^ • ;''^...; -\ WF .^ ^ JS^'Kehru, SyoNanhi Nagwanshi, y ' Agedabout 50 years. Kohda, S/o Thuiyan 1 Aged about 55 years. ^j Kohda, S/o Thuiyan Nagwanshi, Vitangu, S/o ThyiyanNagyanshi, Aged about 60 yeai-s. ^KlQn-applicants No.l to 4 all I cultivators. ;No.r, 3, 4 8s 5 R/6 \ Village: Basahtpui-, :No.2 R/o Narayanpur, PS 85 Tehsil: Lailynga, District: Raigarh(e.G.) f ^State df Chhattisgarh, Thraugh the eollector, District: Raigarh (C.G.) ^ • : ;:;:' :- • ^ APPLICATION FOR RBST&RATIOW OrSEGOND A1PPEAI. N0.474/1995 ^i <a ^.1 iWfl BA; ''SSilswxssEa'Ess^em^'fssas^''""'"1'"''' y^^iSSSSSfS^'.Kf ^!tSid! vj-cc|"yi#lctA|; ty^'(i<ia^Ri«iti^ /^7^<;_.C^.....(/.°^ *11t»I^TT^" """'————••• s snt^wifeii* :Hsn3ii$?[^'*ii* c 'l ^-_ 3II^?Tiraw(<it|Ig<»<g) g^aTtRtilea sn^st 21.11.2008 Shri H.S.Palel, learned|couhsel for the applicant,^ ShriA.N.Bhakta, learn Heardon M'.C.P.No. 7 ^d counsel for respondents No. 1 to 5. i1/2005, application for oondonation ofdelay infilingthe M.C.C. Learned Counsel for t|®respondents does not oppose the above appiication. , The appijcatiQn is allo|*/ed for the reas.ons mentioned in the said application. , Also heard on Second Appeal No. 474/1995( Learned cpunsel for th|e applicant submits that the Second Appeal No. 474/1995 was dismissed revive the same. ;He further position to engage the counsi for non-prosecution. This application is al^i Tespondents. In view of the abov^ appeal is allowed for the reas|ons stated in it. Office is directed to number. <nitifo<i1i ii*ic9l"'l"ls'<3'(Rl'(5SI'' ''..: ;::1: ; 'fr3I^T3IT^[;.;ss-M^. No,109/2005, a'pplicatidn for restoration of |bythis Court on28.02.2005 wth a libertyto ^ubmits that since the appli.eant was not in a on 28.02.2005, the appeal was dismissed o not opposed by Searned.counsel for the the application for restoration of second restore the second appeal-in itsoriginal Sd/- ^ | Dhirendra Mishra^ Judge i' y^ ^P/FS/2pQ5-20,000' ^ - -/ • •