Narottam v. Gadarai
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur allowed an application for condonation of delay in filing an application for restoration of Second Appeal No. 348/2009 to its original number subject to payment of costs.
What did the court decide?
Restored Second Appeal No. 348/2009 to original number subject to payment of Rs. 2,000 within 15 days.
What the court decided
1 (MCC No. 316 of 2022)
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
MCC No. 316 of 2022
Narottam S/o Vinod Bihari Aged About 31 Years Occupation Agriculturist, R/o Village Badamooda, Paasgaon, Tala, Tahsil And District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
---- Applicants
Versus
- Gadarai S/o Dukhu Kolta Aged About 53 Years Occupation Agriculturist, R/o Village Tala, Paasgaon, Jadakuda, Tahsil And District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
- Amrit Lal S/o Dukhu Kolta Aged About 50 Years Occupation Agriculturist, R/o Village Tala, Paasgaon, Jadakuda, Tahsil And District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
- Mu. Lalit D/o Dukhu Kolta Aged About 45 Years Occupation Agriculturist, R/o Village Tala, Paasgaon, Jadakuda, Tahsil And District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
- Mu. Safed Bai D/o Dukhu Kolta Aged About 35 Years Occupation Agriculturist, R/o Village Tala, Paasgaon, Jadakuda, Tahsil And District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the delay of 86 days in filing the application for restoration of the Second Appeal should be condoned.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Narottam S/o Vinod Bihari
- respondent
Gadarai S/o Dukhu Kolta
- respondent
Amrit Lal S/o Dukhu Kolta
- respondent
Mu. Lalit D/o Dukhu Kolta
- respondent
Mu. Safed Bai D/o Dukhu Kolta
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Chhattisgarh HC
- Decided on
- · February
- Registered
- Case no.
- MCC/316/2022
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court