1 2025:CGHC:1376 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCC No. 6 of 2025 1 - (Deleted) Man Singh (Dead) Through Lrs Nil 1.1 - Kishore Sonwani S/o Late Man Singh Aged About 41 Years R/o Village Bundeli, Tahsil And District Mahasamund, C.G. 1.2 - Keshar Joshi D/o Late Man Singh Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Bundeli, Tahsil And District Mahasamund, C.G. 1.3 - Ghasnin Bai Wd/o Late Man Singh Aged About 65 Years R/o Village Bundeli, Tahsil And District Mahasamund, C.G. 2 - 2 (A) Munni Bai Wd/o Late Bodhan Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Bundeli, Tahsil And District Mahasamund, C.G. 2.1 - Lait S/o Late Bodhan Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Bundeli, Tahsil And District Mahasamund, C.G. 2.2 - Raju S/o Late Bodhan Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Bundeli, Tahsil And District Mahasamund, C.G. 2.3 - Manju D/o Late Bodhan Aged About 20 Years R/o Village Bundeli, Tahsil And District Mahasamund, C.G. 2.4 - Lalita D/o Late Bodhan Aged About 16 Years Minor Through Legal Guardian Mother Smt. Munni Bai Wd/o Late Bodhan, R/o Village Bundeli, Tahsil And District Mahasamund, C.G. 2.5 - Lokeshwari D/o Late Bodhan Aged About 14 Years Minor Through Legal Guardian Mother Smt. Munni Bai Wd/o Late Bodhan, R/o Village Bundeli, Tahsil And District Mahasamund, C.G. 2.6 - Sagarchand S/o Late Bodhan Aged About 9 Years Minor Through Legal Guardian Mother Smt. Munni Bai Wd/o Late Bodhan, R/o Village Bundeli, Tahsil And District Mahasamund, C.G. 2.7 - Tukeshwar S/o Late Bodhan Aged About 6 Years Minor Through Legal Guardian Mother Smt. Munni Bai Wd/o Late Bodhan, R/o Village Bundeli, Tahsil And District Mahasamund, C.G. ... Applicants versus 2 1 - Khilawan S/o Jethuram Kurre Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Firgi, Tahsil And District- Mahasmund C.G. 2 - Budhram S/o Jethuram Kurre Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Firgi, Tahsil And District- Mahasmund C.G. 3 - Bhagirathi S/o Tijau Aged About 52 Years R/o Village Jhalao, Police Station Pithora, Tahsil And District- Mahasmund C.G. 4 - Bhagatram S/o Tijau Aged About 49 Years R/o Village Jhalao, Police Station Pithora, Tahsil And District- Mahasmund C.G. 5 - Kamla Wd/o Jagatram Aged About 43 Years R/o Village Jhalao, Police Station Pithora, Tahsil And District- Mahasmund C.G. 6 - Dhanita S/o Jagatram Aged About 7 Years Minor Through Mother Smt. Kamla, Wd/o Jagatram, R/o Village Jhalap, Police Station Pithora, Tahsil And District- Mahasmund C.G. 7 - Ganga D/o Tijau, W/o Gangaprasad Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Jhalap, Police Station Pithora, Tahsil And District- Mahasmund C.G. 8 - Parvati D/o Tijau, W/o Gangaprasad Aged About 56 Years R/o Village Jhalap, Police Station Pithora, Tahsil And District- Mahasmund C.G. 9 - Sohadra Bai @ Belan D/o Tijau, W/o Bhokwa Aged About 54 Years R/o Village Tenduwahi, Tahsil And District- Mahasmund C.G. 10 - Dheliya D/o Botari, W/o Khuman Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Firgi, Tahsil And District- Mahasmund C.G. 11 - Bodhni D/o Botari, W/o Radhelal Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Sewati, Tahsil And District- Mahasmund C.G. 12 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector, Mahasamund Tahsil And District Mahasamund, C.G. ... Respondents (Cause title, as taken from CIS) For Applicants : Ms. Payal Jain, Advocate For State/ Respondent No.12 : Mr. Vivek Sharma, Panel Lawyer. (Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi ) Order on Board 09/01/2025 1. Heard on I.A. No.01/2024, application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay. 3 2. On due consideration and for the reasons mentioned in the application, which is well supported by an affidavit, aforesaid application is allowed and delay of 71 days in filing instant MCC is hereby condoned. 3. Also heard on MCC. 4. This MCC has been filed for restoration of SA No.652/2015, which was dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 03.09.2024. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that inadvertently, applicants could not find out SA No.652/2015 in the cause list on the date of hearing i.e. 03.9.2024, therefore, they could not appear in the case. She further submits that mistake is bonafide, hence, she prayed that this MCC may be allowed and the concerned SA No.652/2015 may be restored to its original number. 6. Learned State counsel has no objection to allow the prayer, made by learned counsel for the applicants. 7. On due consideration and the reasons stated by learned counsel for the applicants, this MCC is allowed and the order dated 03.9.2024 passed in SA No.652/2015 is recalled. 8. The Registry is directed to restore SA No.652/2015 {Man Singh (Deleted) and Ors. Vs. Khilawan and Ors.}, which was dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 03.9.2024, in its original number. 9. Accordingly, this MCC is allowed. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Rukhsar RUKHSAR BANO Digitally signed by RUKHSAR BANO Date: 2025.01.10 18:29:41 +0530