Both first appeals were dismissed as withdrawn upon the appellants’ applications.

Both first appeals arose from the judgment and decree dated 29 October 2014 passed by the Sixth Additional District Judge, Durg, in Civil Suit No. 18-A/2013.

In F.A. No. 198 of 2014, Omprakash Dani and Sunil Dani sought withdrawal of their appeal through I.A. No. 1/2026.

Thereafter, in F.A. No. 170 of 2014, Ramnarayan Nishad and Than Singh Nishad also sought withdrawal in view of the withdrawal of F.A. No. 198 of 2014.

Whether F.A. No. 198 of 2014 should be permitted to be withdrawn on the basis of the withdrawal application filed by its appellants?

Whether F.A. No. 170 of 2014 should also be permitted to be withdrawn in view of the withdrawal of F.A. No. 198 of 2014?

The Court applied the general procedural principle that an appellant may withdraw an appeal upon filing an appropriate application, subject to the Court’s consideration of the reasons stated and the absence of any legal impediment.

This principle is ordinarily reflected in Order XXIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, concerning withdrawal of proceedings; however, the order does not expressly refer to any statutory provision or precedent.

The Court examined the withdrawal application in F.A. No. 198 of 2014 and found the reasons stated therein sufficient, thereby allowing the appeal to be withdrawn.

Since F.A. No. 170 of 2014 was sought to be withdrawn on account of the withdrawal of the connected appeal, the Court accepted the appellants’ request in that appeal as well.

The Court therefore did not adjudicate the merits of the underlying civil dispute or the correctness of the judgment and decree dated 29 October 2014.

It likewise dismissed F.A. No. 170 of 2014 as withdrawn.

Accordingly, both first appeals were dismissed as withdrawn, without any determination on the merits of the original civil suit.