Allowed¶26

Kripa Ram Sahu v. Praveen Kumar Sahu

Condonation of delay – Restoration of appeal

Chhattisgarh HC9 Dec 2025MCC/543/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur (Rajani Dubey & Bibhu Datta Guru, JJ.; order per Rajani Dubey, J., dated 10/12/2025) allowed MCC No. 543 of 2025 filed by Kripa Ram Sahu for restoration of FA No. 99 of 2020, which had been dismissed by peremptory order dated 17.12.2024. I.A. No. 01/2025 for condonation of delay was allowed and restoration was granted subject to payment of Rs. 3,000/- cost to the High Court Legal Aid Committee. Advocates: Keshav Dewangan for applicant; N.K. Kashyap, P.L. for State. Marked NAFR; no statutes or precedents discussed.

What did the court decide?

Restoration of FA No. 99 of 2020 to its original number, subject to payment of cost of Rs. 3,000/- to the High Court Legal Aid Committee; delay in filing the restoration application condoned. ¶26

Kripa Ram Sahu Vs Praveen Kumar Sahu — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

2025:CGHC:59973-DB

NAFR

Digitally signed by JYOTI JYOTISHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.12.11 16:57:40 +0530

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

MCC No. 543 of 2025

¶7

Kripa Ram Sahu R/o E-5, Shatabdi Nagar, Telibandha Raipur, Tehsil And District Raipur (C.G.)

¶8

...Applicant(s)

¶9

versus

¶10

1. Praveen Kumar Sahu S/o Shri Sewa Ram Sahu Aged About 43 Years R/o Vill. Kasekera, P.H. No. 57/38 Revenue Circle Komakhan, Tah. Baghbahera, Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.)

¶11

2. Gopal Prasad Sen (Since Deceased) Through Lrs. Nil

¶12

2.1. Smt. Meena Kaushik (Deleted) Nil

¶13

2.2. Romu Kaushik S/o Late Gopal Prasad Sen Aged About 30 Years R/o Nagar Naka Chowk, Ratan Colony, Ward No. 32, Dhamtari, Tah. P.S. And Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.)

¶14

2.3. Ankit Kaushik S/o Late Gopal Prasad Sen Aged About 30 Years R/o Nagar Naka Chowk, Ratan Colony, Ward No. 32, Dhamtari, Tah. P.S. And Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.)

¶15

2.4. Shrawan Kaushik S/o Late Gopal Prasad Sen Aged About 25 Years R/o Nagar Naka Chowk, Ratan Colony, Ward No. 32, Dhamtari, Tah. P.S. And Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.)

¶16

3. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector Mahsamund, Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.)

¶17

... Respondent(s)

¶18

¶19

For Applicant : Shri Keshav Dewangan, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Ms. N.K. Kashyap, P.L.

¶20

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey, J Hon'ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru, J

¶21

Order on Board

¶22

Per Rajani Dubey, J 10/12/2025

¶23

Heard on I.A. No. 01 of 2025 i.e. application for condonation of delay in filing the restoration application.

¶24

On due consideration and for the reasons mentioned in the application, I.A. No. 01/2025 is allowed. Delay in filling the restoration application is condoned.

¶25

This MCC has been filed for restoration of FA No. 99 of 2020, which was dismissed by peremptory order by this Court vide order dated 17.12.2024.

¶26

On due consideration and pleadings made in the application for restoration, the MCC is allowed and FA No. 99 of 2020 is restored to its original number subject of payment of cost of Rs. 3,000/- to the High Court Legal Aid Committee.

¶27

SD/SD/-

¶28

(Bibhu Datta Guru) ( Rajani Dubey) Judge Judge

¶29

Jyoti

Kripa Ram Sahu v. Praveen Kumar Sahu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kripa Ram Sahu v. Praveen Kumar Sahu

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

Saturn Ferro Alloys, Situated Vs Sub Divisional Magistrate

Kripa Ram Sahu Vs Santuram Yadav

Smt. Sagarika Bhoi Vs Bijeyendra Bhoi

U. Chandrashekhar Vs Smt. Sarita

Smt. Premlata Vaishnav Vs Sunil Vaishnav

Kripa Ram Sahu Vs Mintaram Sahu (Since Deceased) through LRs