Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 17825 (CHH)

SMT. RANI GUPTA (RANI GOSAI AFTER MARRIAGE) v. DAMODAR GOSAI ALIAS SONU GOSAI

MCC/217/2026 · 2026-03-01

Shri Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:10656 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCC No. 217 of 2026 Smt. Rani Gupta (Rani Gosai After Marriage) W/o Shri Damodar Gosai Aged About 22 Years Permanent Address- Bajrang Tekri, Post Tata Nagar, P.S. Bagbera Purvi, District Singhbhum, Jharkhand, Currently Residing At Ward No. 02, Tulsi Nagar, Tahsil And District Korba, Chhattisgarh (Address Incorrectly Mentioned In The Cause Title Before Learned Family Court, Bilaspur In C.S. No. 167 A /25) ... Petitioner. Versus Damodar Gosai Alias Sonu Gosai S/o Shri Gurusharan Gosai Aged About 27 Years R/o Makan No. 2641, Ward 07, Sai Mandir, Radha Swami, Tifra, Industrial Estate, Thana Sirgitti, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent. (cause title downloaded from CIS Periphery) For Petitioner : None. For Respondent : None. (Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi ) Order on Board 02/03/2026 1. This is an office reference. 2. Perused the office note filed by the Registry. Learned Judge, Family Court Korba, District Korba has sent request letter dated 06.02.2026 seeking extension of time to decide Civil Suit No.151A/2025 (Damodar Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI DN: cn=AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, ou=HIGH COURT, o=HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, st=Chhattisgarh, c=IN Date: 2026.03.03 10:26:27 +0530 2 Gosai Vs. Smt. Rani Gupta) in compliance order dated 11.09.2025 passed in TPC No.128/2025 (Smt. Rani Gupta Vs. Damodar Gosai), whereby, this Court has directed the concerned Court to conclude the case preferably within a period of 4 months. 3. A bare perusal of PUD letter dated 06.02.2026 would show that case has been fixed for plaintiff evidence for at least 5 times, despite that plaintiff evidence has not been completed, which cannot be appreciated. Therefore, it is expected from the concerned learned Family Court that it shall not take lenient approach in granting continuous opportunity to the parties to adduce the evidence, rather if leniency found on the part of the parties in court proceedings, then it may imposed appropriate penalty/cost and proceed in the matter in accordance with law. 4. With the aforesaid observation and considering the PUD dated 06.02.2026, prayer for extension of time is allowed. Further time of 4 months’ from the date of receipt/communication of this order is granted to decide the said case. 5. Registry shall send copy of this order to the concerned Court forthwith. 6. Accordingly, the MCC stands disposed of. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Ajay