[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Kamlesh Kumar vs Harishankar Patel on 9 March, 2026
1
2026:CGHC:11196-DB
Digitally
NAFR
signed by
PRASHANT
PRASHANT DEWANGAN
DEWANGAN Date:
2026.03.10
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
10:51:08
+0530
FAM No. 7 of 2024
1 - Kamlesh Kumar S/o Late Heeralal Patel Aged About 51 Years R/o
Village Bhedikona, Tahsil Dhabra, District Janjgir-Champa Presently
District Sakti (C.G.)
2 - Sanjay Kumar S/o Late Heeralal Patel Aged About 49 Years R/o
Village Bhedikona, Tahsil Dhabra, District Janjgir-Champa Presently
District Sakti (C.G.)
3 - Smt. Hullasmati Wd/o Late Heeralal Patel Aged About 70 Years R/o
Village Bhedikona, Tahsil Dhabra, District Janjgir-Champa Presently
District Sakti (C.G.)
4 - Smt. Chameli Patel W/o Dr. Dinesh Patel Aged About 45 Years R/o
Near Raigarh District Court, Chakradhar Nagar, Tahsil Raigarh, District :
Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
5 - Smt. Rukmani Nayak D/o Late Lukeshwar Prasad, Wd/o Late
Dharamnath Nayak Aged About 68 Years R/o Village Devgaon, Tahsil
Baramkela, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
6 - Suresh Kumar S/o Late Amrit Lal Aged About 63 Years R/o Village
Bhedikona, Tahsil Dhabra, District Janjgir-Champa Presently District
Sakti (C.G.)
... Appellants
versus
1 - Harishankar Patel S/o Late Krishna Lal Patel R/o Village Bhedikona,
Tahsil Dhabra, District Janjgir-Champa Presently District Sakti (C.G.)
2
2 - Gourishankar Patel S/o Late Krishna Lal Patel R/o Village
Bhedikona, Tahsil Dhabra, District Janjgir-Champa Presently District
Sakti (C.G.)
3 - Smt. Padum Kunwar Wd/o Late Krishna Lal Patel R/o Village
Bhedikona, Tahsil Dhabra, District Janjgir-Champa Presently District
Sakti (C.G.)
4 - Shadanand Patel S/o Late Reshmlal Patel R/o Village Bhedikona,
Tahsil Dhabra, District Janjgir-Champa Presently District Sakti (C.G.)
5 - Hiteshwar Patel S/o Late Reshmlal Patel R/o Village Bhedikona,
Tahsil Dhabra, District Janjgir-Champa Presently District Sakti (C.G.)
6 - Kumudani Patel Wd/o Late Reshmlal Patel R/o Village Bhedikona,
Tahsil Dhabra, District Janjgir-Champa Presently District Sakti (C.G.)
7 - Smt. Urmila Devi Wd/o Late Jeevanlal Choudhary R/o Village Teka,
Tahsil Pusoor, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
8 - Executive Engineer Water Resources Survey And Barrage
Construction Division No.01, Kharsiya, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
9 - Smt. Shweta Patel D/o Late Madhav Patel Presently Posted As Civil
Judge, Class-2, Dondilohara, Tahsil Dondilohara, District : Balod,
Chhattisgarh
10 - Manas Patel S/o Late Madhav Patel Aged About 6 Years Through
Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Shweta Patel, Presently Posted As Civil
Judge, Class-2, Dondilohara, Tahsil Dondilohara, District : Balod,
Chhattisgarh
11 - Land Acquisition Officer And Sub-Divisional Officer (R) Dhabra,
District Janjgir-Champa, Presently District Sakti (C.G.)
12 - Janak Kumari W/o Khiti R/o Village Ruda, Tahsil Saraipali, District :
Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
13 - Omprakash S/o Late Teklal R/o Village Kenduwa, Tahsil- Saraipali,
District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
14 - Savitri Devi S/o Late Teklal R/o Village Kenduwa, Tahsil- Saraipali,
District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
15 - Parmeshwari D/o Late Teklal, W/o Kartikram Patel R/o Aadarsh
Village Mowa, Tahsil And District Raipur (C.G.)
3
16 - Ajit @ Linraj Patel R/o Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.)
17 - Suman S/o Mohit Patel R/o Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.)
18 - Mohit Nayak S/o Kartik Ram Nayak R/o Saraipali, District
Mahasamund (C.G.)
19 - Harish S/o Danadran R/o Village Parsadhi, Tahsil Sarangarh,
District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.)
20 - Ramlata D/o Late Dileshwar Patel R/o Village Parsadhi, Tahsil
Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.)
21 - Soniya D/o Late Dileshwar Patel Through Natural Guardian
Ramlata, R/o Village Parsadhi, Tahsil Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-
Bilaigarh (C.G.)
22 - Yuvraj S/o Late Dileshwar Patel Through Natural Guardian
Ramlata, R/o Village Parsadhi, Tahsil Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-
Bilaigarh (C.G.)
23 - Danadran S/o Late Parmanand Patel, R/o Village Parsadhi, Tahsil
Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.)
24 - Shyam Kumari W/o Tiblunath R/o Village Chhatadhi, Tahsil
Sarangarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
25 - Dinanath S/o Khublal R/o Village Kenduwa, Tahsil Saraipali, District
: Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
... Respondents
For Appellants : Mr. Malay Shrivastava, Advocate appears
alongwith Ms. Anu Mishra, Advocate
For Respondents : Mr. Sourabh Sharma, Advocate
No.1,2,4 to 7
D.B:-Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal &
Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad
Order on Board
Per Sanjay S. Agrawal, J.
09/03/2026
1. The matter is listed in default as the appellants have failed to
deposit the deficit court fee of Rs.1,04,878/-.
2. Counsel appearing for the appellants prays for three days time
to remove the default, as pointed out by the Registry.
3. From perusal of the record, it appears that, the instant appeal
has been preferred by the appellants under Section 74 of the
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013,
questioning the legality and propriety of the impugned award,
dated 04/12/2023 passed by the Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Tribunal, Chhattisgarh in
Reference Case No.178/2017, with a deficit court fee of
Rs.1,04,878/-.
4. Since, the appeal has been filed with deficit court fee, it was,
therefore, listed in default on 06/03/2024 and, vide said order,
dated 06/03/2024, one week time was granted to cure the
same as per the request made by the counsel appearing for
the appellants, but the same was not removed. Therefore, for
removing the said default, this Court has granted time on
02/09/2024, 03/10/2024, 10/12/2024, 28/01/2025 and also on
10/06/2025, but the appellants have failed to cure the same
and, even when a per-emptory order was passed on
31/07/2025 while granting ten days time more with a direction
that if the appellants failed to pay the deficit court fee of
Rs.1,04,878/- then the appeal shall be dismissed automatically.
5. It appears further that despite the passing of the aforesaid per-
emptory order, deficit court fee, was not paid, owing to which,
the appeal was dismissed.
6. It appears further that for the restoration of the said appeal, a
petition, being MCC No.29/266, was filed and vide order dated
16/01/2026, the same was allowed and the appeal being FAM
No.7/2024 was directed to be restored to its original number. It
is to be seen further that the matter was, thereafter, listed
before the Additional Registrar (Judicial) on 19/02/2026, but
none was present, therefore, the matter was directed to be
listed before the Court, but the counsel appearing for the
appellants again praying for time to deposit the requisite court
fee of Rs.1,04,878/-.
7. In view of above, it is evident that despite providing sufficient
opportunities, the appellants have failed to deposit the deficit
court fee and, just trying to keep the matter pending one way or
the other, instead of obeying the directions issued on several
occasions, we are, therefore, not inclined to grant further time
for depositing the alleged deficit court fee of Rs.1,04,878/-. The
appeal is, accordingly dismissed.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Sanjay S. Agrawal) (Amitendra Kishore Prasad)
JUDGE JUDGE
Prashant
