Page No.1 of 4 IN MCC-1063-2024 2025:CGHC:15492 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCC No. 1063 of 2024 [Arising out of order dated 25.08.2017, passed in Arbitration Appeal No.27 of 2014 (M/s. Abhishek Trading Company v. CG State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd.) by this Court] M/s Abhishek Trading Co., through Rajkishore Kesharwani (Proprietor), S/o Late Hira Lal Kesharwani, aged about 61 years, R/o Mungeli Naka, Nehru Nagar, Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) ... Applicant Versus CG State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd., through its Managing Director, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ... Non-applicant ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Applicant : Dr. Veena Nair, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Anish Tiwari, Advocate ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 02 . 04 .202 5 1. This MCC has been filed seeking restoration of Arbitration Appeal No.27 of 2014, which was dismissed for want of prosecution by order of this Court dated 25.08.2017. 2. Firstly heard on IA No.01, which is an application filed under Section 05 of the Limitation Act, 1963, seeking condonation of delay of 1889 days in filing the present restoration application (MCC). 3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the delay occurred in filing this MCC is due to bonafide reason and the same is not SAIFAN KHAN Digitally signed by SAIFAN KHAN Date: 2025.04.05 12:09:53 +0530 Page No.2 of 4 IN MCC-1063-2024 intentional one. She further submits that on account of non-appearance of the counsel for the applicant therein, the arbitration appeal was dismissed. However, after dismissal of the arbitration appeal on 25.08.2017, the counsel for the applicant was not aware about the same and, only after a prolonged period of time, the counsel for the applicant got information about passing of the order dated 25.08.2017. Learned counsel by taking this Court to the medical documents (Annexure-A/3 & A/4) further submits that the applicant himself was not in touch with the counsel, as his younger brother and nephew were undergoing medical treatment at the relevant point of time. 4. Learned counsel also submitted that applicant’s brother was admitted in Max Super Specialty Hospital, New Delhi and was undergoing treatment for chronic kidney ailment. The applicant has also a bedridden nephew, aged about 19 years, who is suffering from Cancerous Brain Tumor. Subsequently, applicant’s nephew become blind and, therefore, requires constant supervision and care. There is nobody responsible in the family of the applicant to take care of his brother and nephew. The applicant being the sole caretaker of both of them had to rush from pillar to post, therefore, could not keep his eye on the arbitration appeal filed before this Court. It is also submitted that meanwhile there was an outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic and, his brother, was also one of the victim of the said pandemic, who last his breaths on 27.03.2025. Hence, the delay occurred in filing this restoration application may kindly be condoned. Page No.3 of 4 IN MCC-1063-2024 5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent would vehemently oppose the application for condonation of delay and submits that there is a huge delay in filing this MCC and, therefore, the same is liable to be rejected. 6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the material available on record and, specially considering the factum of medical exigency occurred in case of the applicant on account of severe ailments of his brother and nephew, who were undergoing treatment and there was nobody else responsible in the family of the applicant to look after them and, on account of such ailment, applicant’s brother died and his nephew became blind and, in between, there was also an outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic and further considering the fact that the arbitration appeal was dismissed vide order dated 25.08.2017, as the counsel for the applicant therein could not appear before the Court, therefore, on account of the mistake on the part of the counsel, the litigant/applicant cannot be made to suffer, I am of considered opinion, that the applicant has shown sufficient cause in filing this restoration application (MCC) with a delay of 1889 days and, accordingly, the same is liable to be condoned. 7. Consequently, the delay of 1889 days in filing this restoration application (MCC) is hereby condoned. IA No.01 is allowed. 8. Also heard on admission. 9. The application being arguable is admitted for hearing. Page No.4 of 4 IN MCC-1063-2024 10. Issue notice to the non-applicant. Mr. Anish Tiwari, learned counsel appearing for the non-applicant accepts notice. 11. With the consent of the parties, heard finally. 12. For the reasons stated in the main application, the same is liable to be allowed. Order dated 25.08.2017, passed by this Court, is hereby recalled. Arbitration Appeal No.27 of 2014 is restored to its original number for hearing and disposal in accordance with law subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) before the Chhattisgarh High Court Legal Services Committee and file poof thereof within 15 days from today. 13. Accordingly, the MCC allowed. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge s@if