( 2025:JHHC:16547 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No. 615 of 2023 ----- Shankho Oraon, aged about 47 years, Son of Late Oraon, resident of Village –Kudra, Police Station & Post Office –Sisai, District –Gumla (Jharkhand). … Petitioner Versus 1. Mahali Oraon, son of Late Jamadar Naura Oraon, resident of village –Kudra, at present village –Nagpheni, Post Office & Police Station –Sisai, District –Gumla (Jharkhand). 2. Deputy Commissioner, Gumla, having its office at Gumla, Post Office, Police Station and District –Gumla (Jharkhand). … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate For the Opp. Party No.1 : Mr. Sanket Kumar, Advocate ------ Order No.09 Dated- 20.06.2025 I.A. No.2286 of 2025 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this interlocutory application has been filed with a prayer to grant leave to the petitioner to present the instant civil miscellaneous petition even though he was not party to the Second Appeal No. 585 of 2015. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is the only son of Late Etwa Oraon, who was the sole appellant of Second Appeal No. 585 of 2015. It is further submitted that Etwa Oraon died on 28.02.2023 during the pendency of the said Second Appeal No. 585 of 2015 but due to lack of knowledge, the petitioner could not take the required steps for his substitution and ultimately the said Second Appeal No. 585 of 2015 was dismissed for default on 11.05.2023. It is next submitted that the petitioner has very good grounds to agitate in this civil miscellaneous petition and unless the leave to present the instant civil miscellaneous petition is granted, the petitioner will be highly prejudiced. Considering the aforesaid facts, the prayer of the petitioner to grant leave to the petitioner to pursue the instant civil miscellaneous petition is allowed. This interlocutory application is disposed of accordingly. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) I.A. No.7192 of 2024 Learned counsel for the petitioner does not want to press this interlocutory application. Accordingly, this interlocutory application is rejected as not pressed. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) I.A. No.7193 of 2024 Learned counsel for the petitioner does not want to press this interlocutory application. Accordingly, this interlocutory application is rejected as not pressed. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) C.M.P. No. 615 of 2023 Heard the parties. This civil miscellaneous petition has been filed at the instance of the petitioner for readmission of S.A. No. 585 of 2015 to its original file. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that S.A. No. 585 of 2015 was dismissed for default. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the sole appellant of S.A. No. 585 of 2015 died on 28.02.2023 during the pendency of the said S.A. No. 585 of 2015 and the said appeal was dismissed on 11.05.2023, as due to lack of knowledge, the required steps could not be taken for substitution of the legal representative of the sole deceased appellant of the said S.A. No. 585 of 2015. It is further submitted that the non-appearance of the counsel for the appellant was neither intentional nor deliberate. It is next submitted that the appellant has very good grounds to agitate in S.A. No. 585 of 2015 and unless S.A. No. 585 of 2015 is restored to its original file, the appellant, who is the petitioner herein will be highly prejudiced. Hence, it is submitted that the S.A. No. 585 of 2015 be re-admitted to its original file. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.1 submits that the petitioner is deliberately delaying the disposal of the case with ulterior motive and harassing the opposite party no.1 by lingering the same. Hence, in case the delay is condoned, the opposite parties be adequately compensated with costs. Considering the aforesaid facts, S.A. No. 585 of 2015 is restored to its original file to the stage at which, it was before its dismissal subject to payment of costs of Rs.5,000/- by the petitioner to the opposite party no.1 through the counsel appearing in the record, within two weeks, failing which, this conditional order shall not be given effect to and this civil miscellaneous petition shall stand dismissed without further reference to the Bench. In case, the petitioner files the proof of payment of costs of Rs.5,000/- by the petitioner to the opposite party no.1 through the counsel appearing in the record within two weeks, list S.A. No. 585 of 2015 under the appropriate heading before the appropriate Bench after a week thereafter. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu-Gunjan/