Smt. Pushpa Bai vs Gulab Singh Solanki
2022 Latest Caselaw 5455 Chatt

                                        1

                                                                          NAFR
                HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                 M.C.C. No. 36 of 2020
     1. Smt. Pushpa Bai W/o Sagarmal Agrawal, Aged About 68 Years
        Occupation Cultivation, R/o Old Ticket House, Ravi Nagar, Raipur,
        Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh...................Appellant
     2. Sagarmal Agrawal, S/o Shri Shivnarayan Agrawal, Aged About 75 Years
        Occupation Cultivation, R/o Old Ticket House, Ravi Nagar, Raipur,
        Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh...................Appellant
     3. Subhash Agrawal, S/o Sagarmal Agrawal, Aged About 49 Years
        Occupation Business, R/o Old Ticket House, Ravi Nagar, Raipur, Tahsil
        And District Raipur Chhattisgarh...................Appellant
                                                                 ---- Applicants
                                     Versus
     1. Gulab Singh Solanki S/o Shri Tej Singh Solanki Aged About 45 Years
        Caste Rajput, Proprietor- Prt Construction, R/o 869, Sunder Colony,
        Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh................Respondent
     2. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector/Ex-Officio Secretary, District
        Office Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh....................Respondent
                                                            ---- Non-applicants



For Applicants:                    Shri Sachin Nidhi, Advocate.
For State/Non-Applicant No.2:      Shri Vinod Tekam, Panel Lawyer.


                   Hon'ble Shri Sanjay S. Agrawal, Judge
                 Hon'ble Shri Arvind Singh Chandel, Judge
                             Judgment On Board
26.08.2022

Per Sanjay S. Agrawal, J.

1. Heard on I. A. No.01, an application for condonation of delay of 82 days

in filing this M.C.C.

2. On due consideration and for the reasons assigned therein, which is

duly supported by an affidavit, we are inclined to allow the same.

3. The said application is according allowed and delay in filing this M.C.C.

is hereby condoned.

4. Heard on admission.

5. This M.C.C. has been filed for restoration of M.C.C. No.155/2018, which

was dismissed for non-compliance of the order dated 19.07.2019 as passed in

the said petition.

6. On due consideration and for the reasons assigned therein, we are

inclined to allow the same.

7. Accordingly, the instant M.C.C is allowed and M.C.C. No.155/2018 is

directed to be restored to its original number with a permission to the counsel

for the Applicant for moving an appropriate application for extension of time for

the removal of default(s) as pointed out in the said petition, i.e.,

MCC/155/2018.

8. With the aforesaid observation, the instant petition stands disposed of.

No order as to costs.

                        Sd/-                                        Sd/-

                (Sanjay S. Agrawal)                        (Arvind Singh Chandel)
                     Judge                                        Judge




Nikita