Allowed

Divisional Manager National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Surendra Murmu

Jharkhand HC13 Sept 2024C.M.P./735/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two interlocutory applications were disposed of. The first sought condonation of 381 days delay in filing an appeal, which was granted. The second sought restoration of a dismissed Miscellaneous Appeal to its original file, which was also allowed.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 381 days in preferring appeal condoned; Miscellaneous Appeal No.62 of 2011 restored and listed before appropriate Bench.

Divisional Manager National Insurance Co… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. 735 of 2022

¶2

------

¶3

1. Divisional Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd. Ranchi.

¶4

2. Branch Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd., Dhansar, Dhanbad.

¶5

… … Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

1. Surendra Murmu, son of Kashi Nath Manjhi.

¶8

2. Kashi Nath Manjhi, son of late Babulal Manjhi

¶9

… … Opp. Parties ------

¶10

For the Petitioners : Mr. Alok Lal, Advocate. For the O.P. : Mr. Pradeep Kumar Prasad, Advocate.

¶11

-------

¶12

CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

¶13

------

¶14

04 /13.09.2024

¶15

I.A. No.2043 of 2023

¶16

This interlocutory application has been filed by the petitioners praying therein to condone the delay of 381 days in preferring the appeal.

¶17

2. After going through the averments made in para-9 to 13 of the interlocutory application and upon hearing the parties, I am satisfied that sufficient cause has been shown for condoning the delay caused in preferring the appeal. I am inclined to allow this interlocutory application. Delay of 381 days in preferring the appeal is condoned.

¶18

3. This interlocutory application stands allowed .

¶19

C.M.P. 735 of 2022

¶20

4. This is an application for restoration of

¶21

Miscellaneous Appeal No.62 of 2011 to its original file, which was dismissed for non-compliance of peremptory order dated 22.08.2019 passed by this Court.

¶22

¶23

5. Mr. Alok Lal, learned counsel representing the petitioners, submits that he will comply the peremptory order within two weeks by serving a copy of the Miscellaneous Appeal to the learned counsel who is appearing on behalf of the claimant in this Civil Misc. Petition.

¶24

6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party namely Mr. Pradeep Kumar Prasad, submits that he will accept notice on behalf of the claimant in the Miscellaneous Appeal also.

¶25

7. Considering the said submission of counsel for the parties, I am inclined to allow this petition.

¶26

8. Accordingly, this Civil Misc. Petition is allowed .

¶27

9. The Miscellaneous Appeal No.62 of 2011 be restored to its original file. After restoration, the same be listed before an appropriate Bench as per roster.

¶28

10. Name of learned counsel Mr. Pradeep Kumar Prasad, shall henceforth be reflected in the cause list on behalf of the claimant in the Miscellaneous Appeal also.

¶29

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

¶30

Prashant.Cp-2

¶31

Divisional Manager National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Surendra Murmu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Divisional Manager National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Surendra Murmu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhagwan Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand

Balvinder Singh Vs Shri P M Prasad Chairman Cum Managing Director Coal India Ltd.

Jai Ram Jha Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Sharif Alam Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pushkar Singh Munda Vs the State of Jharkhand

Bisakha Pandit Vs Madhai Pandit