[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Kartiko Ram vs Prabhu Ram on 17 April, 2026
1
2026:CGHC:17544
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCC No. 357 of 2026
1 - Kartiko Ram S/o. Late Sukaru Ram Aged About 75 Years Husband
Of The Late Manpyari Bai, Caste Gayar, Occupation- Agriculture,
R/o.- Village Uparkachhar, P.H.N. 03, Rani M.- Tapkara, Tehsil
Farsabahar, District- Jashpur Chhattisgarh.
2 - Balbhadra Yadav S/o. Shri Kartiko Ram Aged About 50 Years
Caste Gayar, Occupation- Agriculture, R/o.- Village Uparkacchar,
Digitally
signed by
P.H.N. 03, Rani M.- Tapkara, Tehsil Farsabahar, District- Jashpur
SHOAIB
SHOAIB ANWAR
ANWAR Date:
Chhattisgarh.
2026.04.17
16:11:29
+0530
3 - Krishna Yadav S/o. Shri Kartiko Ram Aged About 47 Years Caste
Gayar, Occupation- Agriculture, R/o.- Village Uparkacchar, P.H.N. 03,
Rani M.- Tapkara, Tehsil Farsabahar, District- Jashpur Chhattisgarh.
4 - Devmati Bai @ Dhamela Bai D/o. Kartiko Aged About 40 Years
Caste Gayar, Occupation- Agriculture, R/o.- Village Uparkacchar,
P.H.N. 03, Rani M.- Tapkara, Tehsil Farsabahar, District- Jashpur
Chhattisgarh.
2
5 - Giridhar Ram S/o. Late Rajendra Ram Aged About 53 Years Caste
Gayar, Occupation- Agriculture, R/o.- Village Uparkacchar, P.H.N. 03,
Rani M.- Tapkara, Tehsil Farsabahar, District- Jashpur Chhattisgarh.
6 - Nagpati W/o. Rajendra Aged About 40 Years Caste Gayar,
Occupation- Agriculture, R/o.- Village Uparkacchar, P.H.N. 03, Rani
M.- Tapkara, Tehsil Farsabahar, District- Jashpur Chhattisgarh.
... Applicant
versus
1 - Prabhu Ram S/o. Late Shivnath Aged About 58 Years Village
Uparkacchar, Tehsil Farsabahar, District- Jashpur (C.G.)
2 - Jhori Singh S/o. Late Shivnath Aged About 56 Years R/o. Village
Uparkacchar, Tehsil Farsabahar, District- Jashpur (C.G.)
3 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Collector Jashpur District-
Jashpur (C.G.)
... Respondent(s)
(Cause title taken from CIS)
For Applicants : Shri Virendra Verma, Advocate
For Respondent(s) : Shri Malay Jain, Panel Lawyer
Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge
Order on Board
17.04.2026
1. By way of the present MCC, the applicants/ defendants
have sought the following reliefs:
"It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this
Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this
application and issue a Direction to the trial court
for the strictly comply the order dated 06/11/2025
passed by this Hon'ble court and vacate/setting
aside the stay order dated 10/05/2023 &
15/01/2025 and direct the trial to complete the trial
within 6 month's without any adjournment, in the
interest of justice."
2. The present MCC has been filed by the applicants, being
aggrieved by the non-compliance of the order dated
06.11.2025 passed by this Court in MA No.217/2025,
arising out of the order dated 15.01.2025 passed by the
learned 1st District Judge, Kunkuri, District Jashpur (C.G.)
in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 04/2024, whereby the learned
trial Court allowed/extended the application under Order
39 Rule 1 and 2 of the CPC filed by the plaintiffs. Further,
on 17.12.2025 and 11.02.2026, applications under Order
17 Rule 1 of the CPC were allowed and time was granted.
3. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, this Court
on 06.11.2025 has passed the following order:-
"3. Having considered the limited prayer made by
the counsel for the appellants and for the reason
that an interim injunction in favour of the
plaintiffs has already been granted, the duration
of which, as earlier fixed by the First Appellate
Court has lapsed, which has since been extended
by the impugned order, this Court deems it
appropriate to direct the concerned trial Court to
proceed in the pending civil suit (original case) in
an expeditious manner. Ordered accordingly.
4. Furthermore, no adjournment should normally
be granted in favour of the plaintiffs and if the
concerned trial Court finds that the plaintiffs are
delaying the trial in any manner, after issuing
appropriate notice to the plaintiffs, it may take
appropriate steps for vacating the interim stay.
5. With the aforesaid observation/direction, this
Appeal stands disposed of."
4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that this
Court, vide order dated 06.11.2025, clearly directed that
no unnecessary adjournments shall be granted to the
plaintiffs and further empowered the trial Court to
vacate the interim stay in case of delay attributable to
them. Despite such categorical directions, the
respondent/plaintiff has deliberately prolonged the
proceedings by seeking repeated adjournments,
including by moving an application under Order 17 Rule
1 CPC at the stage of evidence.
5. It is further submitted that the conduct of the
respondent/plaintiff demonstrates a clear intention to
delay the trial and avoid its expeditious conclusion, in
direct violation of the directions issued by this Court. The
order sheets dated 17.12.2025 and 11.02.2026
substantiate this pattern of delay. It is further submitted
that the respondent/plaintiff has failed to comply with
the order dated 06.11.2025, and therefore, the interim
relief granted in their favour deserves to be vacated.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the applicants and
upon perusal of the record, this Court finds that vide
order dated 06.11.2025, a clear direction has already
been issued by this Court to the concerned trial Court to
proceed with the trial expeditiously and further that no
unnecessary adjournments shall ordinarily be granted to
the plaintiffs. It has also been specifically observed that
in the event the trial Court finds that the plaintiffs are
delaying the proceedings, it shall be at liberty to take
appropriate steps, including vacating the interim stay
after due notice.
7. In view of the aforesaid specific directions already
governing the field, this Court is of the considered
opinion that no further orders are required to be passed
in the present MCC.
8. However, it is observed that in case the applicants/
defendants are aggrieved by any alleged delay or non-
compliance, they shall be at liberty to move an
appropriate application before the learned trial Court,
which shall consider and decide the same in accordance
with law and in light of the directions already issued by
this Court.
9. With the aforesaid liberty, this MCC is disposed of.
Sd/-
(Bibhu Datta Guru)
Judge
Gowri/Shoaib
