Dinesh Agrawal v. Reeta Ghosal

Chhattisgarh HC24 Aug 2025MCC/256/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur; MCC No. 256 of 2025; Dinesh Agrawal v. Reeta Ghosal & Ors.; single Bench (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi, J.); order dated 25/08/2025; restoration of first appeal FA No.13/2020 earlier dismissed for want of prosecution on 18.02.2025 due to counsel's absence (engaged in another Court); MCC allowed, appeal restored to original number; NAFR.

What did the court decide?

Restoration of FA No.13/2020 to its original number. ¶¶23

Dinesh Agrawal Vs Reeta Ghosal — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

Digitally signed byRAVI RAVI SHANKAR SHANKAR MANDAVI MANDAVI Date: 2025.08.26 11:37:54 +0530

¶3

2025:CGHC:42837

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

MCC No. 256 of 2025

¶7

1 - Dinesh Agrawal S/o Balkishan Agrawal Aged About 48 Years R/o Baraejpara, Ambikapur, District- Sarguja (C.G.), District- Sarguja (Ambikapur) Chhattisgarh.

¶8

... Applicant

¶9

versus

¶10

1 - Reeta Ghosal W/o Samarnath Ghoshal Aged About 67 Years VillageSubhash Nagar, Tehsil- Ambikapur, Police Station And Post OfficeAmbikapur, District- Surguja Chhattisgarh, District- Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh.

¶11

2 - Ranjeet Mandal S/o Late Shri Baburam Mandal Aged About 58 Years Village- Subhash Nagar, Tehsil- Ambikapur, Police Station And Post Office- Ambikapur, District- Surguja Chhattisgarh, District- Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh.

¶12

3 - Rajendra Prasad Sahu S/o Late Beni Prasad Sahu Aged About 58 Years R/o Hospital Road Ambikapur, Police Station And Post OfficeAmbikapur, District- Surguja Chhattisgarh, District- Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh.

¶13

... Respondent(s)

¶14

(Cause title is taken from Case Information System)

¶15

For Applicant : Ms. Swati Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent No.1 : Ms. Jigyasa Tiwari, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. Siddharth Pandey, Advocate

¶16

(Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)

Order on Board

25/08/2025

Heard on M.C.C., application for restoration of FA No.13/2020, which was dismissed vide order dated 18.02.2025 for want of prosecution.

¶21

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that on 18.02.2025, counsel appearing for the applicant was engaged in another Court, thus, she could not appear when the case was taken up for hearing, therefore, the same was dismissed for want of prosecution. Hence, the said mistake was bonafide and the applicant wants to contest the case on merits, thus the instant MCC may be allowed.

¶22

On due consideration and for the reasons mentioned in the restoration application, instant MCC is hereby allowed.

¶23

Accordingly, the Registry is directed to restore FA No.13/2020, (Dinesh Agrawal vs. Reeta Ghoshal and Others) in its original number.

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

( Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi ) Judge

¶26

Ravi Mandavi

Dinesh Agrawal v. Reeta Ghosal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinesh Agrawal v. Reeta Ghosal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gopal Krishna Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Neelmani Dewangan Vs Chhattisgarh State Co. Operative Marketing Federation

Dr. Govind Prasad Tiwari, Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dwarika Vs Sushil Bai @ Sushila

Dr. Manik Chatterjee, Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dwibhashi Ramprasad Vs State of Chhattisgarh