Disposed¶35

Balduram Sahu Aged About 84 Years (Dead) through Lrs v. Somin Bai

Chhattisgarh HC9 Mar 2026MCC/237/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Restoration of first appeal dismissed for want of prosecution; FAO 58/2012; counsel absent on date of hearing; property rights dispute; Dhamtari; Sahu family litigants; State of Chhattisgarh; High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur; MCC No. 237 of 2026; Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal; order dated 10/03/2026; appeal restored to original number; MCC disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Application for restoration allowed; First Appeal No. 58/2012 restored to its original number. ¶35

Balduram Sahu Aged About 84 Years (Dead) through Lrs Vs Somin Bai — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

2026:CGHC:11514

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

MCC No. 237 of 2026

¶6

1 - Balduram Sahu Aged About 84 Years (Dead) Through Lrs Nil.

¶7

1.1 - Vishnuram Sahu (Died) Through Lrs.- As Per Hon'ble Court Order Dated 21-11-2024.

¶8

1.1.1 - Smt. Koushliya Bai Sahu Wd/o Late Vishnuram Sahu Aged About 67 Years Resident Of Jodhapur Ward, Dhamtari, Tahsil And District- Dhamatari (Chhattisgarh)

¶9

1.1.2 - Vinod Kumar Sahu S/o Late Vishnuram Sahu Aged About 52 Years Resident Of Jodhapur Ward, Dhamtari, Tahsil And District- Dhamatari (Chhattisgarh)

¶10

1.1.3 - Smt. Purnima Sahu D/o Late Vishnuram Sahu W/o Shri Kuleshwar Sahu Aged About 50 Years Resident Of Village- 731, Rajgaura Chowk, Ward No. 18, Potiadih, Dhamtari Tahsil And District- Dhamatari (Chhattisgarh)

¶11

1.1.4 - Smt. Dhaneshwari Sahu D/o Late Vishnuram Sahu W/o Shri Yogeshwar Sahu Aged About 43 Years R/o Ward No. 5, Bajrang Chowk Demar, Tahsil And Distt.- Dhamatari, Chhattisgarh

¶12

1.1.5 - Santosh Kumar S/o Late Vishnuram Sahu Aged About 42 Years Resident Of Jodhapur Ward No. 19, Dhamatari, Tahsil And DistrictDhamatari Chhattisgarh

¶13

¶14

2 - Kanhaiya Sahu S/o Late Baldauram Sahu Aged About 48 Years R/o Jodhapur Ward Dhamtari Tahsil And District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh

¶15

... Petitioner(s)

¶16

versus

¶17

1 - Somin Bai Wd/o Late Gandhiram Sahu Aged About 58 Years ThroughThe Collector, Dhamtari, Distt. Office, Dhamtari, Tah. And Distt. Dhamtari C.G., District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh

¶18

2 - Khamhan Lal S/o Late Gandhiram Sahu Aged About 37 Years R/o Jodhapur Ward Dhamtari, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh

¶19

3 - Heera Panjwani S/o Gopimal Panjwani Aged About 40 Years R/o Risaipara Ward, Dhamtari, Tahsil And District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh, DistrictDhamtari, Chhattisgarh

¶20

4 - Prakashchand Chimnani S/o Chinkamal Aged About 37 Years R/o Amapara Ward, Dhamtari, Tahsil And District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh

¶21

5 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector, Dhamtari, District Office, Dhamtari, Tahsil And District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh, District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh

¶22

6 - Smt. Bed Bai Wd/o Late Heeralal Sahu Aged About 45 Years R/o Jodhapur Ward Dhamtari, Tahsil And District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh, DistrictDhamtari, Chhattisgarh

¶23

7 - Chuneshwar Sahu S/o Late Heeralal Sahu Aged About 22 Years R/o Jodhapur Ward Dhamtari, Tahsil And District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh, DistrictDhamtari, Chhattisgarh

¶24

¶25

8 - Shailendra Sahu S/o Late Heeralal Sahu Aged About 20 Years R/o Jodhapur Ward Dhamtari, Tahsil And District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh, Distt. Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh

¶26

... Respondent(s)

¶27

For Petitioner(s) :	Mr. R.S. Patel, Advocate
For Respondent No. 3 & 4 :	Ms. Swati Agrawal, Advocate
For Respondent No. 5 :	Ms. Isha Jajodia, Panel Lawyer

¶28

Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J.

¶29

Order on Board

¶30

10/03/2026

¶31

Heard.

¶32

This is an application for restoration of the first appeal No. 58/2012 which is dismissed for want of prosecution on 09.02.2026.

¶33

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that due to unavoidable circumstances learned counsel appearing for the applicant could not appeared on the date when the matter was called for hearing and the first appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution on 09.02.2026.

¶34