In an application for restoration of a Family Assistance Matter dismissed for want of prosecution, the High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed the restoration after accepting bona fide grounds for the applicant's absence.
M.C.C. No.361/2018 allowed; FAM No.93/2014 restored to original number.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
MCC No.361 of 2018
Banshilal, aged about 34 years, S/o Anju Yadav, Village Saabar, Thana Kasdol, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.
---- Applicant
Versus
Smt. Gangotri Bai, W/o Shri Banshilal Yadav, aged about 27 year, Jhagrakhand Colliery, Tahsil Manindragarh, Revenue, District Korea (Chhattisgarh). ---- Non-applicants
For Applicant : Mr. Shailendra Shukla, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Sumit Shrivastava, Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta Order On Board
10/08/2018
(2) The applicant is seeking restoration of FAM No.93/2014 which was dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 16.04.2018.
(3) On due consideration of the submissions of the counsel for the applicant and the grounds taken in the restoration application, I am satisfied that the absence of the applicant's counsel on 16.04.2018 when FAM No.93/2014 was taken-up for hearing was based on bonafide grounds.
(4) Accordingly, M.C.C. No.361/2018 is allowed and FAM No.93/2014 is restored to its original number.
Sd/- (Sharad Kumar Gupta) Judge
L/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the application for restoration of Family Assistance Matter No.93/2014 dismissed for want of prosecution should be allowed.
Banshilal
Smt. Gangotri Bai
Sharad Kumar Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
