1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 43 of 2023 1 - Khileshwar Sinha S/o Bahal Ram Sinha, Aged About 43 Years R/o Shanti Nagar, Rajnandgaon District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Rehana Begam @ Ashu W/o Khileshwar Sinha, R/o Pandit Deendayal Nagar, Ward No. 16, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Ravi Kumar Banjare, Advocate For respondent : Mr. Chandrabhushan Kesharwani, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 07.07.2025 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “(i) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to the petitioner's case. (ii) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ/or writs/order/or orders, to quash impugned order dated 07.12.2022 (Annexure P-1) passed by the learned Family Court Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh, which is arising out of order dated 07.12.2022 passed by learned Family Court Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh in Civil Suit No. 147A/2013, in the interest of justice. (iii) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the learned trial court below to restore the Civil Suit No. 147A/2013 on its original number, in the interest of justice. (iv) Any other relief which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case including cost of the petition, may also be granted.” 2. Mr. Banjare, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner had filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act before the learned Family Court. He would further REKHA SINGH Digitally signed by REKHA SINGH -2- submit that the petitioner could not appear before the learned Family Court on 09.07.2019, therefore, the petition was dismissed for want of prosecution. He would also submit that an application for restoration was moved but the same was also dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 07.12.2022. He would contend that the present has been filed against the order dated 7.12.2022. 3. On the other hand, Mr. Kesharwani, learned counsel appearing for the respondent would oppose the submissions made by Mr. Banjare. 4. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties at length and perused the documents placed on the record. 5. In the present case, the petition filed by the petitioner for dissolution of marriage under the provisions of Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act was dismissed for want of prosecution on 09.07.2019. The petitioner moved an application for restoration but no one appeared on the date of hearing therefore, it was also dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 07.12.2022. Against the said order, the petitioner has preferred this petition. 6. The petitioner has not challenged the order dated 09.07.2019 in the present petition. The petitioner may move an application for restoration of the petition filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act and restoration of the earlier application, therefore, this petition is not maintainable and is accordingly dismissed. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to take recourse to the law. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha