Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 6450 (JHR)

AMAR SAHU v. RASH BIHARI GANJHU

C.M.P./576/2025 · 2026-04-17

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:JHHC:11148] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No.576 of 2025 ------ 1. Amar Sahu, aged about 46 years, 2. Raju Sahu, aged about 48 years Both son of Late Mahabir Sahu, Resident of Village- Bhatti Road, Khunti, P.O. & P.S.- Khunti, District- Khunti, Jharkhand. … Petitioners Versus Rash Bihari Ganjhu, aged about 75 years, son of Late Bahor Ram Ganjhu, resident of Village- Dahugutu, P.O. + P.S. + District- Khunti, Jharkhand. … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. S.B. Gupta, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Shailendra Kr. Tiwari, Advocate ------ Order No:-04 Dated:-17-04-2026 Heard the parties. This Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer for restoration of S.A. No. 288 of 2023 to its original file which stood dismissed for non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 04.10.2024. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that S.A. No. 288 of 2023 was dismissed for non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 04.10.2024. It is next submitted that by the said order, the appellants of S.A. No. 288 of 2023 were directed to remove defects as pointed out by the stamp reporter within two weeks from the date of that order but due to the mistake on the part of the Advocate’s Clerk, the same could not be removed within the stipulated time; which resulted in dismissal of the said S.A. No. 288 of 2023 for non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 04.10.2024. It is further submitted that non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 04.10.2024 was neither deliberate nor intentional. It is also submitted that the petitioners have very good grounds to agitate in the said S.A. No. 288 of 2023 and unless the same is restored to its original file, the petitioners will be highly prejudiced. Hence, it is submitted that the S.A. No. 288 of 2023 be restored to its original file. Learned counsel for the opposite party has not raised any objection to the prayer of the petitioners. Considering the facts of the case and the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners, S.A. No. 288 of 2023 is directed to be restored to its original file at the same stage at which it was before its dismissal. Registry is directed to list S.A. No. 288 of 2023 before the appropriate Bench after a week. This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is disposed of accordingly. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated:- 17.04.2026 Saroj/