This judgment grants a restoration petition filed under Civil Miscellaneous Petition No. 294 of 2019, restoring a previously dismissed motion in the original file based on sufficient grounds of inadvertence.
Restoration of M.A. No. 488 of 2018 in 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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
C.M.P. No. 294 of 2019
Jagadish Mahato …… Petitioner
Versus
…… Opposite Parties
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
For the Petitioner : Mr. J.N. Upadhyay, Advocate For the Opposite Parties :
6/Dated: 22/07/2022
This Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed for restoration of
M.A. No. 488 of 2018 in its original file which was dismissed for non compliance of order dated 07.03.2019.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that inadvertently requisite for notice for both process has not been filed inspite of peremptory order that is why M.A. No. 488 of 2018 was dismissed.
In view of the aforesaid facts and considering the averments made
in the interlocutory application, sufficient ground for restoration has been made.
Accordingly, M.A. No. 488 of 2018 is restored in its original file.
C.M.P. No. 294 of 2019 stands allowed and disposed of.
( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Satyarthi/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a motion for restoration should be allowed when the petitioner fails to show cause for an order but claims inadvertence on the part of counsel.
Jagadish Mahato
1. Tarani Mahato
2. Santosh Mahato
3. Sambhu Mahato
4. Digambar Mahato
5. Habu Mahato
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court