Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 19538 (CHH)

AMBIKA v. KAMESH

MCC/480/2026 · 2026-05-12

Shri Bibhu Datta Guru

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:22448 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCC No. 480 of 2026 1. Ambika S/o Late Ramgahan Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Jhalpi And Jarhadeeh, Tahsil Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 2. Anand S/o Late Ramgahan Aged About 47 Years R/o Village Jhalpi And Jarhadeeh, Tahsil Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 3. Karamchand S/o Late Ramgahan Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Jhalpi And Jarhadeeh, Tahsil Balrampur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) 4. Mukesh S/o Late Ramgahan Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Jhalpi And Jarhadeeh, Tahsil Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 5. Vikesh S/o Late Ramgahan Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Jhalpi And Jarhadeeh, Tahsil Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 6. Smt. Sunita D/o Late Ramgahan Aged About 57 Years R/o Village Dumarkhola, Tahsil Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 7. Smt. Anita Gupta D/o Late Ramgahan Aged About 45 Years R/o Balrampur, Tahsil Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 8. Heeralal S/o Late Soti Sao Aged About 59 Years Village Jhalpi And Jarhadeeh, Tahsil Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2026.05.14 10:55:05 +0530 2 9. Jawahar S/o Late Soti Aged About 58 Years R/o Village Jhalpi And Jarhadeeh, Tahsil Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 10. Smt. Rupani D/o Late Soti Sao Aged About 54 Years R/o Village Patora, Tahsil Dhourpur, Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 11. Rajaram S/o Moti Sao Aged About 55 Years (Wrongly Mentioned Soti Sao In The Impugned Judgment), R/o Village Jhalpi And Jarhadeeh, Tahsil Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 12. Smt. Jitni D/o Late Moti Sao Aged About 49 Years (Wrongly Mentioned Soti Sao In The Impugned Judgment), R/o Village Jhalpi And Jarhadeeh, Tahsil Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 13. Smt. Savita D/o Late Moti Sao Aged About 44 Years (Wrongly Mentioned Soti Sao In The Impugned Judgment), R/o Village Chumra, Tahsil Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. Kamesh S/o Late Mogal Sao Aged About 65 Years Occupation- Service, R/o Village Jhalpi And Jarhadeeh, Tahsil Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 2. Umesh S/o Late Mogal Sao Aged About 62 Years Occupation Agriculture, R/o Village Jhalpi And Jarhadeeh, Tahsil Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 3. Jagnarayan S/o Late Awadhesh Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Jhalpi And Jarhadeeh, Tahsil Balrampur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) 4. Devnarayan S/o Late Awadhesh Aged About 57 Years R/o Village Jhalpi And Jarhadeeh, Tahsil Balrampur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) 5. Chandrika Sao D/o Late Puran Sao Aged About 69 Years R/o Village Jhalpi And Jarhadeeh, Tahsil Balrampur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) 3 6. Mundrika Sao S/o Late Puran Sao Aged About 65 Years R/o Village Jhalpi And Jarhadeeh, Tahsil Balrampur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) 7. Krishna S/o Late Puran Sao Aged About 63 Years R/o Village Jhalpi And Jarhadeeh, Tahsil Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 8. Basdev S/o Late Puran Sao Aged About 61 Years R/o Village Jhalpi And Jarhadeeh, Tahsil Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 9. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector, Balrampur- Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr.Vikas Pandey, Advocate For Respondent/ State : Ms. Anuja Sharma, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Justice Shri Bibhu Datta Guru Order on Board 13/05/2026 1. This MCC has been filed for restoration of S.A. No. 563 of 2025 which was dismissed by a peremptory order of this Court dated 02.02.2026. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter was listed on 02.02.2026, wherein one week time was granted to remove the default. However, due to an inadvertent mistake on the part of the counsel, the same could not be done within the prescribed period, resulting in dismissal of the appeal. 3. On due consideration of the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and the pleadings in the MCC, the same 4 is allowed. S.A. No. 563 of 2025 is restored to its original number, subject of payment of cost of Rs. 2,000/- to the Chhattisgarh High Court Legal Services Committee. SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Jyoti