Allowed

Rajvanti and Ors. v. Bhagwan Das and Ors.

Rajasthan HC3 Jul 2024CRES/5/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur condoned a delay of 1645 days in filing a restoration application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act and ordered restoration of the dismissed civil miscellaneous appeal SBCMA No.1206/2011, subject to deposit of costs.

What did the court decide?

The civil miscellaneous appeal SBCMA No.1206/2011 was restored to its original number conditional on deposit of Rs 3,000 costs.

Rajvanti and Ors. Vs Bhagwan Das and Ors. — Execution and Attachment | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:26659]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Restoration No. 5/2019

¶4

Rajvanti W/o Sh. Ramkishan, aged 43 Years, R/o House No. 184 A, New Railway Colony, Lalgarh, Bikaner.

¶5

Ramkishan S/o Mangaram, Aged About 47 Years, R/o House No. 184 A, New Railway Colony, Lalgarh, Bikaner.

¶6

Neelam S/o Sh. Ramkishan, Aged About 21 Years, R/o House No. 184 A, New Railway Colony, Lalgarh, Bikaner.

¶7

Sumita D/o Sh. Ramkishan, Aged About 16 Years, R/o House No. 184 A, New Railway Colony, Lalgarh, Bikaner.

¶8

----Petitioners

¶9

Versus

¶10

Bhagwan Das S/o Sh. Sugnaram, B/c Jat, R/o Near M.s. College, Gajner Road, Bikaner At Present R/o Moda Tehsil Ratangarh District Churu. (Driver)

¶11

Lakhu Singh S/o Sh. Jay Singh, R/o Bhagwan Ka Mohalla, Old Ginanni, Bikaner (Owner)

¶12

National Insurance Company Limited, Panchshati Circle, Sadulganj, Bikaner. (Insurance Company)

¶13

----Respondents

¶14

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jaswant Singh for Mr. SK Verma

¶15

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI

¶16

Order

¶17

03/07/2024

¶18

Despite service of notice on respondent No.3 of the restoration application, nobody puts in appearance on its behalf. An application has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay of 1645 days in filing the restoration application.

¶19

[2024:RJ-JD:26659]

¶20

[CRES-5/2019]

¶21

For the reasons mentioned in the application, the application is allowed and the delay in filing restoration application is condoned.

¶22

The instant restoration application has been filed by the petitioner-applicant seeking restoration of the civil misc. appeal bearing SBCMA No.1206/2011, which was dismissed in default vide order dated 26.11.2012 on account of non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 02.11.2012 passed by this Court.

¶23

Having considered the grounds as set out in the restoration application and in the interest of justice, the same is allowed and the appeal bearing SBCMA No.1206/2011, is ordered to be restored to its original number, subject to the condition that the appellants shall deposit a cost of Rs.3,000/- before the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority, Jodhpur.

¶24

Office to proceed.

¶25

(DR. NUPUR BHATI),J

¶26

21-amit/-

Rajvanti and Ors. v. Bhagwan Das and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajvanti and Ors. v. Bhagwan Das and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sharmila Bhootra Vs Shanker Lal Sharma

U.I.Ins.Co.Ltd. Vs Smt.Lila and Ors.

Lrs. of Late Narendra Kumar Johri Vs Virendra Chand Kumbhat

Krishna Kumar Gupta Vs Banshi Lal and Ors.

Smt. Tara Devi and Ors. Vs Smt. Madhubala and Ors.

N.I.C.Ltd. Vs Liladhar and Ors.