Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 29234 (CHH)

SUREKHA NISHAD v. BHUNESHWAR KUMAR NISHAD

MCC/630/2026 · 2026-07-26

Shri Sanjay K Agrawal, Shri Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 CGHC010258742026 2026:CGHC:31832-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCC No. 630 of 2026 1 - Surekha Nishad D/o. Kashi Ram Nishad, Aged About 32 Years R/o. Village, P. S. Chikhali, Tahsil And District - Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus 1 - Bhuneshwar Kumar Nishad S/o. Shri Parmanand Nishad, Profession- Govt. Job, R/o. Q. No. 158, Ward No. 11, Village Era, P. S. Somin, Tahsil And District - Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Love Kumar Ramteke, Advocate. For Respondent : Ms. Sweksha Sharma, Advocate. DB: Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board (27.07.2026) 1. Heard on I.A. No. 01/2026, application for condonation of delay in filing of MCC. 2. Issue notice to the respondent on I.A. No. 01/2026. 3. Ms. Sweksha Sharma, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the respondent. Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2026.07.28 10:26:44 +0530 2 4. Upon due consideration and for the reasons mentioned in the application, the I.A. No. 01/2026 is allowed and the delay of 106 days in filing MCC is hereby condoned. 5. Also heard on MCC. 6. The present MCC has been filed seeking for restoration of FA(MAT) No. 429/2024 which got dismissed on account of peremptory order passed by this Court on 02.02.2026. 7. Learned counsel for the respondent opposed the same and submits that sufficient reasons have not been mentioned in the application. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the reasons mentioned in the application, the MCC is allowed and FA(MAT) No. 429/2024 is directed to be restored to its original number. Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Judge H.L. Sahu