Allowed¶25

Saturn Ferro Alloys, Situated v. Sub Divisional Magistrate

Chhattisgarh HC21 Aug 2025MCC/467/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Restoration of FA No. 159 of 2023 (dismissed for want of prosecution on 27.11.2024) allowed via MCC No. 467 of 2025; delay in filing condoned; restoration conditional on Rs. 5,000 cost to the High Court Legal Aid Services Committee. Applicant: Saturn Ferro Alloys Pvt. Ltd. Respondents: Sub Divisional Magistrate Revenue Raipur, Tehsildar Raipur, State of Chhattisgarh through Collector Raipur, Rajesh Nashine, and Anupam Sahkari Grih Nirman Samiti. Decided 22.08.2025 by Rajani Dubey, J. (per) with Bibhu Datta Guru, J.

What did the court decide?

Delay in filing the MCC condoned; FA No. 159 of 2023 restored to its original number, subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- before the High Court Legal Aid Services Committee. ¶25

Saturn Ferro Alloys, Situated Vs Sub Divisional Magistrate — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

2025:CGHC:42675-DB

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

MCC No. 467 of 2025

¶6

1 - Saturn Ferro Alloys Pvt. Ltd., Situated R-12, Anupam Shakari Grih Nirman Samiti, Maryadit, Anupam Nagar (Shankar Nagar), T.V. Tower Turn, Raipur Tehsil And Dist. Raipur (C.G.)

¶7

...Applicant

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - Sub Divisional Magistrate Revenue, Raipur (C.G.)

¶10

2 - Tehsildar Raipur (C.G.)

¶11

3 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, Raipur (C.G.)

¶12

4 - Rajesh Nashine S/o. Babulal Nashine R/o. Shankar Nagar, Raipur (C.G.)

¶13

5 - Anupam Sahkari Grih Nirman Samiti Maryadit Anupam Nagar, Near Ganesh Mandir, Raipur (C.G.)

¶14

... Respondent(s)

¶15

For Applicant	:Mr. K. Rohan appears on behalf of Mr. AbhyudaySingh, Advocate
For Respondent(s)/State	:Mr. Ashish Shukla, Additional Advocate General

¶16

Hon’ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey,

¶17

Hon’ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru

¶18

Order on Board

¶19

¶20

Per Rajani Dubey, J.

¶21

22.08.2025

¶22

1. Heard on I.A. No. 01/2025 which is an application for condonation of delay in filing the instant application.

¶23

On due consideration and for the reasons mentioned in the application, the same (I.A. No. 01/2025) stands allowed. The delay in filing the instant MCC is hereby condoned.

¶24

Present MCC has been filed seeking restoration of FA No. 159 of 2023 which was dismissed for want of prosecution on 27.11.2024.

¶25

On due consideration, the Bench finds bonafide reasons on the part of the applicant in filing of MCC. Accordingly, MCC stands allowed and FA No. 159 of 2023 stands restored to its original number subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- before the High Court Legal Aid Services Committee.

¶26

Sd/Sd/(Rajani Dubey) (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Judge

¶27

Ruchi

¶28

RUCHI YADAV Digitally signed byRUCHI YADAV

Saturn Ferro Alloys, Situated v. Sub Divisional Magistrate

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saturn Ferro Alloys, Situated v. Sub Divisional Magistrate

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

Badrinath Devangan Vs Smt. Saraswati Devangan

O.P. Singh Vs Union of India

Suresh Kumar Kurre Vs Ku. Khushbu Kurre

Kripa Ram Sahu Vs Santuram Yadav

Smt. Sagarika Bhoi Vs Bijeyendra Bhoi

U. Chandrashekhar Vs Smt. Sarita