SMT. NEETA NILIMA NAIR v. SHARDA KUMAR VISHWAKARMA
MCC/137/2025 · 2025-03-07
Shri Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 7818 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 7818 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1
2025:CGHC:11451
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCC No. 137 of 2025 1 - Smt. Neeta Nilima Nair W/o Manish Nair Aged About 43 Years R/o Ward No. 22, Amakherwa, Manendragarh, Dist. Koriya (C.G.)
... Petitioner versus 1 - Sharda Kumar Vishwakarma S/o Late Shivratan Vishwakarma Aged About 50 Years R/o. Ward No. 18, Amakherwa Road, Opposite Sangam X-Ray, Manendragarh, Dist. Koriya (C.G.) 2 - The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Through- Branch Manager, Branch- Manendragarh, Near- Shri Ram Hospital, Manendragarh, Dist. Koriya (C.G.)
... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. H.A.P.S. Bhatia, Advocate For Respondents : None present. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi
Order on Board 07/03/2025
1. Heard on I.A. No. 1/2025, which is an application for condonation of delay in filing the M.C.C.
2. Counsel for the appellant submits that applicant had sustained injuries in the motor accident, therefore, she filed motor accident claim case before
2 the concerned Claims Tribunal, in which low amount of compensation has been awarded in her favour, therefore, she filed misc. appeal for enhancement of compensation under award, but the same was dismissed on the basis of peremptory order passed by this Court on 24.02.2021. He further submit that since applicant is poor and illiterate lady, she could not contact his counsel right in time, therefore, peremptory order was not complied with, hence, the MAC No. 88 / 2021 was dismissed vide office Note dated 24.03.2021, therefore, it is prayed the delay in filing the M.C.C. is condoned.
3. On due consideration and for the reasons mentioned in the application, which is well supported by affidavit, the application I.A. No. 1/2025 is allowed. Delay in filing the M.C.C. is hereby condoned.
4. Counsel for the petitioner is also heard on restoration application.
5. The petitioner is seeking restoration of M.A.(C) No. 88 of 2021, which was dismissed vide Office Note dated 24.03.2021.
6. For non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 24.02.2021 passed by this Court, applicant’s misc. appeal was dismissed by the office vide office note dated 24.03.2021.
7. Considering the grounds taken in the application and submission made by the applicants, the M.C.C. No.137 /2025 is allowed and the Misc. Appeal (C) No. 88 of 2021, which was dismissed for non-compliance of the court
order dated 24.02.2021 is restored to its original number. A copy of this order be placed on record of the original file. Sd/-
(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)
JUDGE Amit
3