Dismissed¶18

Binod Layak v. Ashok Baghot

Jharkhand HC19 Jun 2026C.M.P./376/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Condonation of delay refused - delay of 1256 days in filing C.M.P. No.376 of 2025; I.A. No.3306 of 2025 dismissed and C.M.P. consequently dismissed; High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi; ANANDA SEN, J.; decided 19.06.2026. Background: second appeal stood dismissed for default on 27.08.2019; limitation for restoration expired on 26.09.2019; ground of ignorance of Law of Limitation and loss of contact with conducting lawyer rejected as insufficient. Parties resident of Village-Baghjhopa, PS Jama, District Dumka.

What did the court decide?

After going through the records, the Court found that no sufficient ground has been shown to condone the delay, and that the only ground (at paragraph 5 of the I.A.) cannot be said to be a plausible ground. ¶14

Binod Layak Vs Ashok Baghot — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

2026:JHHC:17932

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No. 376 of 2025

¶3

Binod Layak, S/o Arjun Layak, Resident of Village-Baghjhopa, PO + PS-Jama, Dist-Dumka. … … Petitioner(s)

¶4

Versus

¶5

Ashok Bhagot, S/o Late Sudarshan Baghot.

¶6

Nirmal Baghot, S/o Late Laxman Baghot.

¶7

Aniruddha Baghot, S/o Late Laxman Baghot.

¶8

All are resident of Village-Baghjhopa, PO & PS- Jama, DistDumka. … … Opp. Party(s)

¶9

CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

¶10

For the Petitioner(s) : M/s Aishwarya Prakash, Advocate For the O.P.(s) : Mr. Ranjan Kumar, AC to Sr. SC-I

¶11

07/ 19^th June, 2026

¶12

I.A. No.3306 of 2025

¶13

1. This Interlocutory Application has been filed for condonation of delay of 1256 days in filing this Civil Miscellaneous Petition.

¶14

2. After going through the records, I find that no sufficient ground has been shown to condone the delay. The only ground is at paragraph No.5 which cannot be said to be a plausible ground, which is quoted hereunder:

¶15

“5. That, it is stated, during pendency of the instant second appeal on account non-availability of the some of the documents, the defects could not be removed and the instant second appeal stood dismissed for default on 27^th August, 2019 and to restore the same, the appellant has filed the instant restoration application but in filing the same the limitation period expired on 26.09.2019 and a delay of 1256 days occurred which was beyond his control due to lack of knowledge with regard to Law of Limitation as the appellant was not in contact of his conducting lawyer since long and thus, he was not aware of the same.”

¶16