-1- C.M.P. No. 796 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No. 796 of 2022 1. Kamlesh Mahta, aged about 52 years, S/o late Narayan Pasi 2. Dinesh Mahto, aged about 50 years, S/o late Narayan Pasi 3. Ranjit Mahta, aged about48 years, S/o late Narayan Pasi 4. Sajni Devi, aged about 70 years, W/o late Narayan Pasi 5. Geeta Devi, aged about 45 years, W/o Late Dilip Pasi 6. Jitendra Pasi, aged about 29 years, S/o Late Dilip Pasi 7. Chutar Pasi, aged about 45 years, S/o Late Maku Pasi All residents of Barmasia, P.O., P.S. & District- Deoghar … Petitioners -Versus- 1. Nageshwar Mahtha, aged about 55 years, S/o Late Ganu Pasi 2. Singeshwar Mahtha, aged about 52 years, S/o Late Ganu Pasi 3. Dropadi Devi, aged about 48 years 4. Malti Devi, aged about 45 years 5. Sobha Devi, aged about 42 years 6. Lucy Devi, aged about 40 years O.P. Nos. 3 to 6 D/o Late Ganu Pasi 7. Santu Pasi, aged about 58 years 8. Munilal Pasi, aged about 56 years, O.P. Nos. 7 & 8 S/o late Patra Pasi 9. Shyam Sundar Pasi, aged about 52 years 10. Chhabilal Pasi, aged about 48 years 11. Rajendra Pasi, aged about 46 years O.P. Nos.9 to 11, S/o Late Ramadhani Pasi 12. Anil Pasi, aged about 47 years, S/o Late Moti Pasi All resident of Village- Barmasia, P.O., P.S. & District- Deoghar 13. Kailash Pasi 14. Pappu Pasi, both M/o Late Bibni Devi and S/o Subhash Pasi, resident of village- Barmasia, P.O., P.S. & District- Deoghar … Opposite Parties ----- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ----- For the Petitioners : Mr. Niranjan Kumar, Advocate For O.P. Nos.1,2,7,8,9,11 & 12 : Mr. Tauseef Jawed, A.C. to Mr. Prashant Pallav, Advocate ----- 08/28.01.2025 This petition has been filed for restoration of Second Appeal No.50/2018, which was dismissed on 11.10.2019 for non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 18.09.2019. -2- C.M.P. No. 796 of 2022 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is delay of 370 days in preferring the C.M.P. and for condonation of that delay, I.A. No.5057 of 2024 has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. He submits that due to COVID-19, the petitioners could not remove the defects and when COVID-19 was over, the matter has been inquired by the petitioners and thereafter restoration petition has been filed and in view of that, such delay has occurred. He submits that even the statutory period of limitation has been extended by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the High Court by judicial order in view of COVID-19. He submits that in view of that, the delay may kindly be condoned. 3. Notice upon opposite parties have been validly served. Mr. Tauseef Jawed, learned A.C. to Mr. Prashant Pallav has appeared on behalf of opposite party nos. 1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 11 and 12 and he submits that he has got no serious objection if the delay is condoned. 4. Considering that due to COVID-19, such delay has occurred and limitation period was waived by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as well as High Court, the prayer made in the I.A. is allowed and the delay of 370 days in preferring the C.M.P. is, hereby, condoned. 5. Accordingly, I.A. No.5057 of 2024 is disposed of. 6. I.A. No.5061 of 2024 has been filed for substituting the legal heirs/successors of appellant no.1 in S.A. No.50 of 2018 and petitioner no.3 in the present C.M.P. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the names of legal heirs/successors of appellant no. 1 and petitioner no.3 are disclosed in paragraphs 3 and 5 respectively of the said I.A. He further submits that this -3- C.M.P. No. 796 of 2022 C.M.P. has been filed on behalf of legal heirs/successors of appellant no. 1 and petitioner no.3. 8. Learned counsel for opposite party nos. 1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 11 and 12 has got no serious objection if the C.M.P. is allowed to be maintained on behalf of legal heirs/successors of the said appellants. 9. Considering that during the pendency of the second appeal, appellant no. 1 and petitioner no.3 left for their heavenly abode and in view of that, the prayer made in the said I.A. is allowed and legal heirs of appellant no. 1 and petitioner no.3 are allowed to maintain C.M.P. 10. Accordingly, I.A. No.5061 of 2024 is disposed of. 11. I.A. No.5062 of 2024 has been filed for ignoring defect no.3 on the ground that appellant no.2 left for his heavenly abode on 28.08.2020 during pendency of the said second appeal and leaving behind only legal heir namely Chutar Pasi, who has already been made party as appellant no.5 in the present petition. He submits that appellant no.8 died leaving behind only wife, namely, Munni Devi, aged about 40 years and for substitution, I.A. No.5061 of 2024 has been filed, which has already been allowed. 12. Learned counsel for opposite party nos. 1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 11 and 12 has got no serious objection. 13. In view of the statement made paragraph 3 of the I.A., the prayer made in the I.A. is allowed. Defect no.3 is ignored. 14. Accordingly, I.A. No.5062 of 2024 is disposed of. 15. In view of the above facts, it transpires that sufficient ground is made out for restoration of Second Appeal No.50 of 2018 to its original file and, as such, Second Appeal No.50 of 2018 is restored to its original file. -4- C.M.P. No. 796 of 2022 16. Learned counsel for opposite party nos. 1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 11 and 12 is put at liberty to file Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite parties for whom, he has appeared, in the second appeal. 17. Accordingly, this civil miscellaneous petition is allowed and disposed of. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Ajay/