Adityadhar Deewan v. Chandrakanta Deewan @ Savita

Chhattisgarh HC16 Jun 2026MCC/507/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhattisgarh High Court restoration order (MCC No. 507 of 2026, decided 17/06/2026, Bibhu Datta Guru, J.): applicant/petitioner Adityadhar Deewan (through Mr. Bharat Gulbani, Advocate) sought recall of the dismissal-in-default of his second appeal SA No.159/2026 effected by the peremptory order dated 27.02.2026; MCC allowed and appeal restored to its original number on payment of Rs.2,000/- cost to the High Court Legal Aid Committee. Useful for: restoration of appeals dismissed under peremptory orders; bona fide mistake in curing registry defaults.

What did the court decide?

Restoration of SA No.159/2026 to its original number, subject to payment of cost of Rs.2,000/- to the High Court Legal Aid Committee. ¶¶34

Adityadhar Deewan Vs Chandrakanta Deewan @ Savita — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

2026:CGHC:24267

¶3

SOURABH BHILWAR Digitally signed by SOURABH BHILWAR Date: 2026.06.17 18:12:54 +0530

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

NAFR

¶6

MCC No. 507 of 2026

¶7

Adityadhar Deewan S/o Late Shri Durgadhar Deewan Aged About 67 Years R/o Village- Ninwa Post- Dharsiwa Tahsil And District- Raipur (C.G.) Present Address- Sohaga Mandir Chowk Bramhanpara Raipur Tahsil And District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

versus

¶10

1 - Chandrakanta Deewan @ Savita D/o Late Dashrathdhar Deewan Aged About 67 Years R/o Shitla Mandir Gali, Behind Purnendu Atta Chakki, Kankali Para Raipur (C.G.)

¶11

2 - Smt. Sarita Sharma W/o Late Shri Rajendra Sharma Aged About 64 Years R/o Shitla Mandir Gali, Behind Purnendu Atta Chakki, Kankali Para Raipur (C.G.)

¶12

3 - Smt. Shashi Agrawal W/o Shri Purushottam Agrawal Aged About 61 Years R/o Shitla Mandir Gali, Behind Purnendu Atta Chakki, Kankali Para Raipur (C.G.)

¶13

4 - Smt. Sandhya, W/o Shri Sharad Mahule Aged About 59 Years R/o Shitla Mandir Gali, Behind Purnendu Atta Chakki, Kankali Para Raipur (C.G.)

¶14

5 - Santoshdhar Deewan S/o Late Dashrathdhar Deewan Aged About 68 Years R/o Village- Ninwa Post- Dharsiwa Tahsil And District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶15

¶16

6 - Anil Kumar Deewan S/o Late Durgadhar Deewan Aged About 29 Years R/o Village- Ninwa Post- Dharsiwa Tahsil And District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶17

7 - Harishdhar Deewan S/o Late Durgadhar Deewan Aged About 58 Years R/o Village- Ninwa Post- Dharsiwa Tahsil And District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶18

8 - Smt. Kalyani Tiwari D/o Late Durgadhar Deewan Aged About 73 Years R/o Lokesh Nagar Dhal Ashwani Nagar, Raipur Tahsil And District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶19

9 - Pramila Sharma D/o Late Durgadhar Deewan Aged About 70 Years R/o Sector-1, Inside Of Intec Office Bhilainagar District- Durg (C.G.)

¶20

10 - Ashutosh Deewan S/o Late Bhagwandhar Deewan Aged About 46 Years R/o Near Jain Mandir Vidyut Nagar Durg Tahsil And District- Durg (C.G)

¶21

11 - Shefali Deewan D/o Late Bhagwandhar Deewan Aged About 43 Years R/o Near Jain Mandir Vidyut Nagar Durg Tahsil And District- Durg (C.G.)

¶22

12 - Swati D/o Late Bhagwandhar Deewan Aged About 40 Years R/o Near Jain Mandir Vidyut Nagar, Durg, Tahsil And District- Durg (C.G.)

¶23

13 - Gulab Yadav S/o Ramkhilawan Yada Aged About 47 Years R/o Laxman Nagar Ramkund Mohalla, Raipur Tahsil And District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶24

14 - Rajesh Yadav S/o Ramkhilawan Yadav Aged About 45 Years R/o Laxman Nagar Ramkund Mohalla, Raipur Tahsil And District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶25

¶26

15 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Collector, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶27

... Respondents

¶28

(Cause title is taken from Case Information System)

¶29

For Applicant : Mr. Bharat Gulbani, Advocate

¶30

(HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE BIBHU DATTA GURU) Order on Board

¶31

17/06/2026

¶32

This MCC has been filed for restoration of SA No.159/2026, which was dismissed in default in terms of the peremptory order dated 27.02.2026 passed by this Court.

¶33

Learned counsel for the applicant/appellant submits that the matter was listed on 27.02.2026 for removal of default and this Court had granted seven days' time to cure the default pointed out by the Registry, failing which the appeal was to stand dismissed automatically. He submits that due to bona fide mistake, the default could not be removed within the stipulated period and consequently the appeal stood dismissed. He further submits that the appellant is interested in prosecuting the appeal on merits and, therefore, prays for restoration of the same.

¶34

On due consideration, the submission made by the counsel for the applicant and the pleadings made in the MCC, it is allowed. SA No.159/2026 is restored to its original number subject to payment of cost of Rs.2,000/- to the High Court Legal Aid Committee.

¶35

Sd/- (BIBHU DATTA GURU) JUDGE

¶36

$. Bhilwar

Adityadhar Deewan v. Chandrakanta Deewan @ Savita

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Adityadhar Deewan v. Chandrakanta Deewan @ Savita

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

Shri Aswan Kumar Chandravanshi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vimla Mishra Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Khan Waquaruzzaman Khan Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rajendra Kumar Choubey Vs Himshikhar Gupta

Mitthulal Gond Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rukmani Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh