[2025:JHHC:37449] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No.954 of 2024 ------ Ahilya Devi aged about 60 years daughter of Vishwanath Prasad resident of Chatra Chowk, New Ward No.17, Old Ward No.10, Holding No.166/A, P.O. and P.S. Chatra, District Chatra (Jharkhand) … Petitioner Versus 1. Sheo Narayan Jaiswal son of Ratan Prasad Jaiswal resident of Main Road, Chatra, Ward No.04, P.O., P.S. and District Chatra 2. Niranjan Prasad son of Bishwanath Prasad, resident of Chatra Chowk, P.O., P.S. and District Chatra. … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Kundan Kr. Ambastha, Advocate For the Opp. Parties : Mr. Anurag Chandra, Advocate ------ Order No:-09 Dated-12-12-2025 Heard the parties. This civil miscellaneous petition has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer for readmission of Second Appeal No.18 of 2015 to its original file, which stood dismissed for non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 27.02.2023 passed by this Court. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that Second Appeal No.18 of 2015 stood dismissed for non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 27.02.2023 passed by this Court to file the proof of payment of cost of Rs.1,000/- by the appellant with the Jharkhand State Legal Services Authority (JHALSA). It is further submitted that due to inadvertence and bonafide mistake, the proof of the said cost could not be filed within the stipulated time, which resulted in dismissal of the said Second Appeal No.18 of 2015, for non-compliance of the said peremptory order dated 27.02.2023, passed by this Court. It is next submitted that non-compliance of the said peremptory order dated 27.02.2023 within the stipulated time, was neither deliberate nor intentional. It is also submitted that the petitioner has very good grounds to agitate in the said Second Appeal No.18 of 2015 and unless the same is restored to its original file, the petitioner will be highly prejudiced. Hence, it is submitted that the Second Appeal No.18 of 2015 be restored to its original file. Learned counsels appearing for the respondents have not raised any serious objection. Considering the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, Second Appeal No.18 of 2015 is directed to be restored to its original file at the same stage at which it was before its dismissal. Registry is directed to list Second Appeal No.18 of 2015 before the concerned Bench after a week. This civil miscellaneous petition is disposed of accordingly. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated- 12.12.2025-Animesh/