Allowed

Purshottam Lal v. Sevakram

Chhattisgarh HC9 Nov 2022MCC/576/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed an application for condonation of 31 days delay in filing an MCC. The Court also restored SA No.433 of 2013 after default was removed, making it a dispositional order with no substantive determination on the underlying dispute.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of 31 days delay in filing MCC allowed; prayer for restoration of SA No.433 of 2013 allowed subject to deposit of Rs.2000/- within seven days; MCC allowed.

Purshottam Lal Vs Sevakram — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCC No. 576 of 2022

¶5

Purshottam Lal S/o Late Kundanlal Tamrakar, Aged About 40 Years,

¶6

Arun Kumar, S/o Late Kundanlal Tamrakar, Aged About 35 Years,

¶7

Bhagirathi S/o Late Kundanlal Tamrakar, Aged About 32 Years,

¶8

Narottam, S/o Late Kundanlal Tamrakar, Aged About 29 Years,

¶9

All the applicants are R/o Dhamdha, Tehsil Dhamdha, District Durg (Chhattisgarh).

¶10

---- Applicants

¶11

Versus

¶12

Sevakram S/o Late Bhurusao Tamrakar, R/o Gupta Chowk, Dallirajhara, Tahsil Balod, District Durg (Chhattisgarh).

¶13

Alok, S/o Late Bhurusao Tamrakar, Aged About 30 Years R/o Tamerpara, Dhamdha, Tehsil Dhamdha, District Durg (Chhattisgarh).

¶14

Balkishan Tamrakar, S/o Toman Sao, Aged About 65 Years,

¶15

Yugal Tamrakar, S/o Balkishan Tamrakar, Aged About 38 Years

¶16

Respondents No.3 & 4 are R/o Saankri, Tahsil Gunderdehi, District Balod, Chhattisgarh.

¶17

Smt. Gomti Tamrakar, W/o Onkar Tamrakar, Aged About 30 Years R/o Daganiya, Raipur (Chhattisgarh).

¶18

Smt. Kesni Tamrakar, W/o Manish Tamrakar, Aged About 27 Years R/o Shankar Nagar, Durg, District Durg.

¶19

Respondents No.3 to 6 are legal representative of defendant No.3Smt. Nirmala Bai, W/o Balkishan, R/o Saankri, Post Pairi, Tahsil Gunderdehi, District Durg, Chhattisgarh.

¶20

Deedi Bai (Lachhu), S/o Late Bhurusao Tamrakar, Aged About 48 Years R/o Tamerpara, Tahsil Dhamda, District Durg Chhattisgarh.

¶21

Smt. Jhulabai, W/o Vidhadhar Tripathi, Aged About 46 Years R/o Hanuman Mandir, Durg Chhattisgarh.

¶22

¶23

Smt. Sunita, W/o Murari Prasad Tamrakar, Aged About 44 Years R/o Chandi Mandir, Gaya Nagar, Durg Chhattisgarh.

¶24

Smt. Bela Tamrakar, W/o Kanhaiya Lal Tamrakar, R/o Light Decoration, Tamrakar, Durg Chhattisgarh.

¶25

Smt. Shail Tamrakar, W/o Videsh Tamrakar, Tamerpara, R/o Durg, District Durg (Chhattisgarh).

¶26

Smt. Vineet, W/o Rajnarayan Kaushik, R/o Tamerpara, Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh.

¶27

Ishwarilal @ Raju Tamrakar, Aged About 35 Years,

¶28

Gungun, D/o Ishwarilal Tamrakar, Aged About 5 Years,

¶29

Yash Tamrakar, S/o Ishwarilal Tamrakar, Aged About 3 Years

¶30

Respondents No.13 to 15 are legal heirs of Smt. Annubai, W/o Ishwari Lal, R/o Pagariya, Farm House, Bhathagaon, Raipur, Tahsil and District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶31

Respondents No.14 and 15 are minors through their natural guardina father Ishwari Lal, O/o Alok Kumar Tamrakar, Tamerpara, District Durg, Chhattisgarh.

¶32

Smt. Kopa Bai, W/o Late Bhurusao Tamrakar, Aged About 48 Years R/o Tamerpara, Tahsil Dhamda, District Durg (Chhattisgarh).

¶33

Smt. Gajjubai, Wd/o Late Vinod Tamrakar, Aged About 57 Years,

¶34

Nutan Tamrakar, S/o Late Vinod Shankar Tamrakar, Aged About 28 Years,

¶35

Girish Tamrakar, S/o Late Vinod Shankar, Aged About 25 Years ,

¶36

Respondents No.17 to 19 are R/o Gobra Nayapara Rajim, Tahsil Abhanpur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh).

¶37

Kumari Aparna Tamrakar, D/o Vinod Shankar Tamrakar, Aged About 21 Years,

¶38

Kumari Aaradhna Tamrakar, D/o Late Vinod Shankar Tamrakar, Aged About 21 Years,

¶39

Kumari Archana Tamrakar, D/o Late Vinod Shankar Tamrakar, Aged About 33 Years,

¶40

Smt. Karuna Tamrakar, D/o Late Vinod Shankar Tamrakar, Aged About 33 Years,

¶41

¶42

Respondents No.20 to 23 are R/o Shankar Nagar, Durg, District Durg (Chhattisgarh).

¶43

Vimal Tamrakar, S/o Late Surendra Kumar Tamrakar, Aged About 55 Years R/o Gobra, Nayapara Rajim, Tahsil Abhanpur, District Raipur

¶44

Respondents No.17 to 24 are legal heirs of defendant No. 12- Smt. Ramabai, W/o Surendra Tamrakar, R/o Brahmanpara, Nayapara, Tahsil Nayapara, Rajim, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh).

¶45

Smt. Paremi Bai, W/o Bisahulal, Aged About 70 Years R/o Ghutku, Tahsil and District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh).

¶46

Smt. Mayadevi, W/o Chandrabhan Tamrakar R/o Manegaon Birsa, Tahsil Baihar, District Balaghat (MP).

¶47

Smt. Anita Chouhan, W/o Bulaki Chouhan, Aged About 37 Years Through Purushottam Tamrakar, R/o Tamerpara, Dhamdha, District Durg (Chhattisgarh).

¶48

---- Respondents

¶49

For Applicants : Ms. Anuja Sharma, Advocate.

¶50

Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel

¶51

Order on Board

¶52

09/11/2022

¶53

Heard on I.A. No.01/2022, application for condonation of delay in in filing the MCC.

¶54

For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed.

¶55

Delay of 31 days is accordingly condoned.

¶56

Also heard on admission.

¶57

On 04.08.2022, SA No.433 of 2013 was listed for orders on default. For this purpose, two weeks' time was granted to remove the default, failing which, the appeal would be dismissed without further reference to the Bench.

¶58

¶59

Since the default pointed out by the Registry was not removed within stipulated time, the appeal was dismissed.

¶60

Taking into consideration the submission and cause shown in the application, I am inclined to restore SA No.433 of 2013.

¶61

Prayer for restoration of appeal is allowed and SA No.433 of 2013 is restored to its original number subject to deposit of Rs.2000/- to the High Court Legal Aid Committee within seven days.

¶62

The MCC is accordingly allowed.

¶63

Sd/-

¶64

(Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge

¶65

Vasant

Purshottam Lal v. Sevakram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Purshottam Lal v. Sevakram

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

David Lakda Vs Raghuvar Singh

Sourabh Dwivedi Vs Axis Bank Limited

M/S Devdatta Parboiling Industries Vs Debts Recovery Tribunal

Ramnarayan Vs Rikhiram and Ors.

Mohd. Jafar Vs Intjamiya Committee, Jama Masjid, Sakti

Salik Ram Vs Shashi @ Harsha Dewangan