Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 30902 (CHH)

SHRI GAJENDRA SINGH BINJHWAR v. SANDEEP KUMAR BARETH

MCC/720/2026 · 2026-08-04

Shri Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 CGHC010259362026 2026:CGHC:34329 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCC No. 720 of 2026 1 - Shri Gajendra Singh Binjhwar S/o Khikhram Binjhwar Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Dewri, Post Office Khaija, Thana Baloda, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh 2 - Smt. Bhagwati Bai W/o Gajendra Singh Binjhwar Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Dewri, Post Office Khaija, Thana Baloda, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh 3 - Rupesh Kumar S/o Gajendra Singh Binjhwar Aged About 18 Years R/o Village Dewri, Post Office Khaija, Thana Baloda, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh 4 - Sameer Singh (Minor) S/o Gajendra Singh Binjhwar Aged About 10 Years Through Gajendra Singh Binjhwar, R/o Village Dewri, Post Office Khaija, Thana Baloda, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh ... Appellants versus 1 - Sandeep Kumar Bareth S/o Resham Lal Bareth Aged About 32 Years R/o Dhodhi Para, P.S. Rampur, District Korba Chhattisgarh (Driver Of The Vehicle Bearing No. C G 12 A X 4819, Which Caused The Accident) 2 - Bihari Lal S/o Gammat Ram Rajak Aged About 50 Years R/o Dhodhi Para P.S. Rampur, District Korba Chhattisgarh (Owner Of The Vehicle Bearing No. C G 12 A X 4819, Which Caused The Accident) 3 - United India Insurance Company Limited Address Goyal Business Park, First Floor No. 26, I C C, T P Nagar, Korba, District Korba Chhattisgarh (Insurer/ Insurance Company Pertaining To The Vehicle Bearing No. C G 12 A X 4819, Which Caused The Accident) ... Respondents Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2026.08.05 17:25:35 +0530 2 For Applicants : Mr. Siddharth Dubey, Advocate. For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Dashrath Gupta, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board (05.08.2026) 1. Heard on MCC. 2. The present MCC has been filed seeking restoration of MAC No. 899/2022, which was dismissed for want of prosecution on 24.06.2026. 3. Although the MAC appeal for enhancement was dismissed for default owing to counsel's continuous failure to appear on three consecutive dates, considering that this is a claimants' appeal, it is appropriate to allow the restoration application (MCC) subject to payment of reasonable costs by the appellants. 4. Accordingly, the MCC is allowed and MAC No. 899/2022 is directed to be restored to its original number, subject to the payment of costs of ₹2,000/- to Chhattisgarh High Court Legal Services Authority within a period of 7 days from today. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge H.L. Sahu