Allowed

Anirudh Singh Bais v. Badri Prasad Gupta

Chhattisgarh HC7 Aug 2012MCC/537/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed an interim application to condone delay in filing the main appeal. Subsequently, the court allowed the restoration of Second Appeal No. 164/2002, dismissed in default on 31.01.2012, finding the counsel's absence was based on sufficient grounds.

What did the court decide?

Application I.A. No. 1/2012 for condonation of delay is allowed. Second Appeal No. 164/2002 is restored. File is listed for hearing.

Anirudh Singh Bais Vs Badri Prasad Gupta — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Chhattisgarh HC (2012)

¶1

EB ^sSB

¶2

Smsh BencfiF

¶3

BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶4

M.C.C.JMQ^ /2012

¶5

CIN THE MATTER OF SECOND APPEAL N0. 164 OF 2002. ^ WHICH HAS BEEN DISMISSED ON 31.01.2012 IN DEFAULT^^ffeAR^

¶6

APPLICANT Singh Bais, aged about APPELLANT 47 years, son of Darab Singh, •s-s.3:l^T€Hilqu-«resident of village Barela, Tahsil S"s'"'"'"'f\ z%.?u-fe""'i"" Mungeli Distt. Bilaspur (CG) ^£S'"3^£-VERSUS Oaied---"" NQN-APPLICANT Prasad Gupta, aged about ^ 66 years, son of Late Ramji Gupta, R/o. Takhatpur, Tah. ^Takhatpur Distt. Bilaspur (CG; APPLICATION FOR RESTORATION OF SECOND^APPEAL N0. t"64 OF 200'2',-DISMISSED IN DEFAULT ON 31'>tfi.2012 •yWS^A)^.a<-s<"><L)

¶7

pt*o--' p<es v® OaWd""

¶8

/-^Si) Basant Kumar Gupta, aged about 51 Years Son of Late tj<^ . BadriPrasad Gupta Rajendra Prasad gupta, aged about 26 years, son ofLate ^-^^ ^S-^Badri Prasad Gupta. Both resident ofTakhatpur, District Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶9

y^^^Wf. ^ft{TfT?,. fa^r^Tr

¶10

TWK-V^T ,Mec .,M3^.1^ ?T:T 20

¶11

wr^T V^K ('^^'i'j

¶12

~S^\W^tT3?7^T s? frtRi'^-114> s^sw Tifta an^i ^r'!i'~TTir-' crcT-.-f 4 fy,.rr •(T^C.T!: ^ ^^ '^^. SJB:HON'Bt.E MRJUSTKE^.K.AGAroftlAL' ; "::;i ' 07.08.2012: :':-j, '.V.."3 ' Shri Matay Kumar Bha^yj1,cpui^l forthep^tWoner. :; i- Heard on I.A. No. 1^2012, which Is an apollration for condonationofdelayinfilingth^M.C.C. On due consideration, { 1 am satisfled that the petitioner succeeded inexptaining the c^iu®qf delayin fllinftthe M.C.C. and, therefore, the applicaUon { I.A,|No; 1/2312} isalt»ive(l(,Dg|ay|nfiling " the M.C.C. is condoned. ! ^ Counsel for the petitione Is alsp hea^ ofi restoration petltion. The petBioner is seelar^; restor^ion c( No. 164/2002 which was dtemi^sed tbr wart Kf pro^acution vide wder dated.31.01.2012.

¶13

On due consideratlon of the submissions ofthe leamed counsel fbr the petitioner and the groi|nds taken in the restoratjcm petjtion, 1 am satisfi«l that the abse|ice of the petitiaier's counsel qn 31.01.2012 when Second Aplpeal No. 164/a02 was teken-up for hearing was basedon ftonaffc)8grounds. < M.C.C. No. 537/2012, ttierefore, ig allowal arid 8»condAppeal No. 164/^)02 is re^oredto itsloriginalnumber. '

¶14

A copy of this qrder be |>liced pn recprd of the priginal flle and the same be listei for hearlng nthene)dwwk.

¶15

Sd/-
N.K.Agarwal
Judge

¶16

Anirudh Singh Bais v. Badri Prasad Gupta

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anirudh Singh Bais v. Badri Prasad Gupta

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Iswar Lal Patel Vs Rampal Patel and Ors.

Yadav Kumar and Anr. Vs Bihari

The Oriental Insurance Com.Ltd. Vs Smt.Rarhin Bai and Ors.

Bhushan Lal Tiwari Vs Sub-Divisional Officer and Ors.

Murlidhar Agrawal Vs Bhartiya Red Cross Society and Others

Satyendra Singh and Ors. Vs Yashwant Singh and Ors.