pi §?yagie genc@ 4/ c“ ax f’ {N THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT B'LASPUR Misc. Civil Appeal No. ‘15,?72004 APPELLANTS 1. DEFENDENTS v X Pakiu Slo Govindram Aged about86 Years, Occupation, Cuktivator Rio Wlage, Kasdoi, Tahsil Kasdol DisvictRaipur. (G6,) \w'V A; °\ 3g. \fldyadhar Aged About, Slo Pakiu 33 Ram Sahu Vears, _ . x?‘ Occupatmn, a /\ Cuitivator, Rio Wiage, Kasdol, " Tahsii Kasdo! DistrictRaipur. (C.G.) Babula! SID Khubu Ram Sahu Aged about 50 Years, Occupatjcn, Cultivator, RIG W!age, Kasdol; Tahsil Kasdol DistrictRaipur. (C.G.) ‘93 \iERsuwsm Ca .agSPggDEmg 1. yLAI N TlFF Sunder!a! Sio Pakiu Sahu Aged About, 55 Years, Occupation, ’ Cuitivator, Rio Wiage, Kasdoi, Tahsi! Kasdo! District, Raipur. ./ Ir DEFENDANT (RESPONDENT . 9 /State (6.6.) of Corrector,Raipur Chhattisgarh, Through w” I M§$CELLAN EOUS SimghamPmE'EAL g9 43 RULE agggiljng gmODE OF CML PROCEDURE r M , w Being aggrieved by order dated whom paseed by H Ad§§onal Distriet Judge Baledabazar. C.G in civil suit No. 4—A/04. {ANNEXURE P”). The above named apeeiiante most humbly and respectfuiiy begs ts refer‘this appeai on the foliowing facts and grounds: ~ i g p ‘ m§ai$ ..M....J.%§~.% “20W snésTW (W) mamm mmmanéa mm#%m wmmm aimam “ r ‘ E S.B. Hon’ble Shri Justice N.K. Aqarwa! \ 11.2.2019 Shri Prakash Tiwari wih Ms. Vandana Tiwari, Advocates for appellants. Shri Raja Sharma, Advacate for respondent No. 1. Shri Sameer Behar! Dane! Lawyer for 8tate/respondent No.2. Learned counsel appearing for appellants eubmlts lhat with the passage of time this appe al has become infructuous. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as having become infructuous. No order asto costs. Consequently, pending applications, stand disposed of. ‘M(C)P No. 1786/04 also stan :ls disposed i// €dl— ' KSAQaiwa‘ Sahu N. Judge <