Dismissed¶38

Sohanlal S/O Shriram v. Gram Panchayat Bardod

Rajasthan HC18 Mar 2025CRES/245/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Civil restoration application; restoration of second appeal dismissed for non-prosecution; defect category; 53 months pendency; Section 5 Limitation Act; condonation of delay of 68 days; suit for declaration and permanent injunction; concurrent findings by trial court and appellate court; Gram Panchayat Bardod; Panchayat Samiti Behror; Alwar; CRES-245/2024; S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 62/2019; Justice Ashok Kumar Jain; decided 18/03/2025; Rajasthan High Court Jaipur Bench.

What did the court decide?

The application for condonation of the 68-day delay in filing the restoration application is allowed and the delay is condoned. ¶28

Sohanlal S/O Shriram Vs Gram Panchayat Bardod — Rajasthan HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:12986]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Restoration Application No. 245/2024

¶4

¶5

S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 62/2019\

¶6

Sohanlal S/o Shriram, Resident Of Bardod, Tehsil Behror, District Alwar (Deceased).

¶7

Shri Prabhudayal S/o Shriram, R/o Bardod, Tehsil Behror, District Alwar(Since Deceased). Through His Legal Heirs-

¶8

2/1. Shri Sagruram S/o Shri Prabhu Dayal, R/o Bardod, Tehsil Behror.

¶9

2/2. Shri Rohtash Saini S/o Shri Prabhu Dayal, R/o Bardod, Tehsil Behror.

¶10

2/3. Shri Om Prakash Saini S/o Shri Prabhu Dayal, R/o Bardod, Tehsil Behror.

¶11

2/4. Smt. Gaindi Devi D/o Shri Prabhu Dayal, R/o Bardod, Tehsil Behror.

¶12

2/5. Smt. Bimla Devi D/o Shri Prabhu Dayal, R/o Bardod, Tehsil Behror, Alwar.

¶13

Shri Banwari Lal S/o Sohanlal, R/o Bardod, Tehsil Behror, District Alwar(Deceased)

¶14

Shri Ratiram S/o Shri Sohan Lal, R/o Bardod, Tehsil Behror, District Alwar.

¶15

----Petitioners

¶16

Versus

¶17

Gram Panchayat Bardod, Tehsil Behror, District Alwar. 2. Panchayat Samiti Behror, Through Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Behror, Alwar.

¶18

----Respondents

¶19

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Kuldeep Bhatia, Advocate on
	behalf of Mr. K.N. Sharma,Advocate
For Respondent(s)	:

¶20

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN

Order

(2 of 3)

[2025:RJ-JP:12986]

[CRES-245/2024]

18/03/2025

Instant Civil Restoration Application is preferred to restore SB civil second appeal No. 62/2019, dismissed for non-prosecution on 04.7.2023.

¶27

Office has pointed out a delay of 68 days and to substantiate the reasons of delay an application under section 5 of Limitation Act is filed.

¶28

Having considered the submissions and the reasons as stated in the application, the application for condonation of delay is here by allowed and delay is condoned.

¶29

Application stands disposed of.

¶30

Considered submission of learned counsel for applicant and perused the order dated 04.07.2023.

¶31

S.B. Civil Second Appeal was preferred by appellantplaintiffs after a concurrent finding by learned trial court and by Appellate Court. Initially, a suit for declaration and permanent injunction was dismissed by the trial court on 26.02.2014 and appeal was also dismissed on 18.12.2018. Aggrieved from aforesaid, a civil second appeal No. 62/2019 was filed on 16.01.2019, but despite several opportunities defects were not cured and after 53 months despite opportunity, the second appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.

¶32

A perusal of proceedings of second appeal indicate that the applicants have not taken steps to cure the defects. Thus, the appeal remain pending for 53 months in defect category it means almost 4 and a half years, the appeal was not taken-up on board

[2025:RJ-JP:12986]

[CRES-245/2024]

(3 of 3)

because defects were not cured. The applicants have failed to show any reason for not curing the defect, the matter was listed even before Registrar and despite opportunity defects were not cured.

¶37

In view of aforesaid, there is no ground to restore S.B. Civil Second Appeal, therefore, the restoration application is liable to be dismissed.

¶38

Accordingly, the restoration application preferred by applicants is hereby dismissed with pending application(s), If any.

¶39

(ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J

¶40

MONU /70

Sohanlal S/O Shriram v. Gram Panchayat Bardod

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sohanlal S/O Shriram v. Gram Panchayat Bardod

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Krishna W/O Anil Kumar Vs Ramswaroop S/O Matoli

Kuldeep Vs Shanti Devi and Others

Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Vs Daanmal Jain S/O Shri Harak Chand Jain

Mamraj Meena S/O Prahlad Ram Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramkumar S/O Shri Prem Chand Vs Narendra Singh S/O Shri Bhanwar Singh

State of Rajasthan Vs Shri Nirmal Chand S/O Late Shri Bhagchand Soni