-1- C.M.P. No. 716 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No. 716 of 2022 Kanchan Kumari, aged about 28 years, wife of Late Mantu Kumar @ Mantu Kumar Prajapati, resident of village Tulbul, Neem Tola, P.O. Hardiamu, P.S. Gomia, District- Bokaro, State Jharkhand, Pin-829111, at present residing at village Hazari Basti, P.O. Hazari, P.S. Gomia, District- Bokaro, Pin-829111 … Petitioner -Versus- 1. Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Limited, 2nd Floor, Dare-House, 2 NSC Bose Road, P.O. G.P.O. Chennai, P.S. Chennai, Chennai, State Tamil Nadu, Pin-600001 and the The Branch Manager, Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Limited, IInd Floor, Om Towers, Bistupur Road, P.O. & P.S Jamshedpur, District- East Singhbhum, State- Jharkhand, Pin- 831001 (Insurer) 2. Ajit Kumar, son of Late Jaynarayan Prasad @ Jaynandan Prasad, resident of village- Gomia, Pansari Tola, P.O. & P.S. Gomia, District- Bokaro, State- Jharkhand, Pin 829111 (Owner) 3. Basudeo Yadav, son of Shri Sundar Yadav, resident of village Birsa, Tola Bhelwatand, P.O. Hardiamu, P.S. Gomia, District- Bokaro, State- Jharkhand, Pin-829111 (driver) 4. Kaushilya Devi, wife of Shri Biharilal Prajapati, resident of village Tulbul, Neem Tola, P.O. Hardiamu, P.S. Gomia, District- Bokaro, State Jharkhand, Pin-829111 5. Bihari Lal Prajapati, son of Late Khuslal Prajapati, resident of village Tulbul, Neem Tola, P.O. Hardiamu, P.S. Gomia, District- Bokaro, State Jharkhand, Pin-829111 … Opposite Parties ----- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Saibal Kumar Laik, Advocate For the Opposite Parties : ----- 05/07.03.2025 I.A. No.9320 of 2022 has been filed for condoning the delay of 38 days in filing the present petition. 2. Mr. Laik, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for non- compliance of the peremptory order, M.A. No.264 of 2019 was dismissed and it has occurred as the counsel for the appellant in the said appeal, who was appearing at that time for the appellant, has left for his heavenly abode and, thereafter the present C.M.P. has been filed by him. 3. The Court finds that sufficient ground is made out to condone the delay and, as such, the delay of 38 days in filing the present petition is condoned. -2- C.M.P. No. 716 of 2022 4. Accordingly, I.A. No.9320 of 2022 is allowed and disposed of. 5. Considering that the notice was not issued in M.A. No.264 of 2019 and for non-compliance of the peremptory order, the said appeal was dismissed and further considering that the counsel who was appearing on behalf of the appellant, has left for his heavenly abode, it appears that sufficient ground is made out to restore the M.A. No.264 of 2019 in its original file and, as such, M.A. No.264 of 2019 is restored to its original file. 6. Accordingly, this C.M.P. is allowed and disposed of. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Ajay/