Petitioner sought restoration of a writ petition dismissed for non-compliance of a peremptory order due to lapse of time during vacation. The bench allowed restoration in the interest of justice, noting the suit proceeded and no notices had been issued.
The writ petition W.P.(C) No. 6093 of 2015 is restored to its original file.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
C. M. P. No. 47 of 2017
Surendra Prasad Mahto & others ..... Petitioners vs.- Baleshwar Mistry ...... Opp. party
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH
--- For the Petitioners : Mr. Santosh Kumar Tiwari, Adv. For the Opposite parties : ---
8/9.11.2017
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
The writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 6093 of 2015 stood dismissed for non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 8th December, 2016 on failure to remove the surviving defects.
Petitioner has sought its restoration explaining the reasons through the averments made in the present petition. It is submitted that the defects could not be cured in terms of peremptory order, which expired during vacation and on the reopening day, it could not be cured. There are no intentional lapses on the part of the petitioner, but he would suffer irreparably as he has been debarred from filing written statement by learned trial court.
The status report received from the court concerned shows the Title Suit No. 146/2013 is running for plaintiff’s evidence and next date fixed was on 31st October, 2017.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that notices had not been issued in the writ petition as it stood dismissed due to non-removal of defects within peremptory time, Therefore, present restoration petition may be allowed at this stage.
Taking note of the reasons urged and the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, the W. P(C) No. 6093 of 2015 is restored to its original file in the interest of justice.
Accordingly, the instant petition stands disposed of.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh,J)
jk
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition dismissed for non-compliance of peremptory order should be restored.
Whether the restoration is permissible in the interest of justice without issue of notices.
Surendra Prasad Mahto & others
Baleshwar Mistry
Aparesh Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
