Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 11756 (CHH)

SURENDRA SAI v. LEELAWATI

WP227/231/2023 · 2025-08-11

Shri Rakesh Mohan Pandey

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

-1- 2025:CGHC:40652 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 231 of 2023 Surendra Sai S/o Late Dileshwar Sai Aged About 36 Years By Caste Kanwar, Occupation Agriculturist, R/o Village Singibahar Patwari Halka No. 03, Tahsil Farsabahar, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - Leelawati D/o Late Mutku Sai Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Singibahar (Barkaspali) Tahsil Farsabahar, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Vishnu Sai S/o Late Mutku Sai Aged About 52 Years Caste Of Kanwar, Occupation Agriculturist, Permanent R/o Village Butkachhar, Tahsil Farsabahar, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Nanhu Sai S/o Late Mutku Aged About 49 Years Caste Of Kanwar, Occupation Agriculturist, Permanent R/o Village Butkachhar, Tahsil Farsabahar, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. 4 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector, Jashpur, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioners : Mr. Nikhil Sahu on behalf of Mr. Akath Kumar Yadav, Advocate For State : Mr. Sanjeev Agrawal, P. L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 12.08.2025 1) In the present case, Civil Suit No. 112A/2011 (Rupan Say @ Cherku Say v. Mutku Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE -2- Say @ Dhoura Say & Others) was filed, which was dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 25.11.2014 by the learned Civil Judge Class-1, Kunkuri, District Jashpur. Against the said judgment and decree, an appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 was preferred. 2) In the said appeal, an application under Order XLI Rule 3 of the CPC read with Section 151 of the CPC was also moved, which was rejected on the ground of delay vide order dated 13.01.2023 by the learned Additional District Judge, Kunkuri, District Jashpur, therefore, the instant writ petition filed against the said order is not maintainable and is accordingly dismissed. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to avail of the remedy available to him under the law. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nadim