2026:JHHC:7828 --1-- C.M.P. No. 91 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI C.M.P. No. 91 of 2021 ---- Kusum Devi, aged about 80 years, wife of Kameshwar Prasad Burnwal, resident of Hanuman Tikri, Ward No.10, Deoghar Municipality, PO and PS – Deoghar, District – Deoghar .... Petitioner -- Versus -- 1. Sadanand Singh, son of Late Baleshwar Singh, resident of Rup Niwas Mohalla, PO and PS – Deoghar, District – Deoghar 2. Yasodha Devi, wife of Kamdeo Prasad Burnwal, presently resident of village – Kajora, PO – Kajora, PS – Andal, District – West Wardman 3. Murari Prasad Burnwal, son of Arjun Prasad Burnwal, resident of village – Sono, PO and PS – Sono, District – Jamui, at present resident of Mohalla – Barmasia, PO, PS and District – Deoghar 4. Bablu Prasad Burnwal, Girdhari Prasad Burnwal, resident of Asansol, PO and PS – Asansol, District West Burdman, present and correct address – Bablu Barnwal, Baker Gali Lane, Ram Babu Chanachur, Asansol, District - Asansol .... Opposite Parties ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioner :- Mr. Aishwarya Prakash, Advocate For the O.P. No.1 :- Mr. Niraj Kishore, Advocate ---- 11/20.03.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the Opposite Party No.1. 2. This petition has been filed for restoration of W.P.(C) No.2499 of 2015 to its original file which has been dismissed for default for non- compliance of the peremptory order dated 14.02.2020. 3. Notice upon the opposite party Nos.2 to 4 have already been effected and opportunity was also provided to them, however, they have chosen not to appear. 2026:JHHC:7828 --2-- C.M.P. No. 91 of 2021 4. Mr. Niraj Kishore, learned counsel has appeared on behalf of opposite party No.1. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that W.P.(C.) No.2499 of 2015 has been dismissed due to inadvertently non- compliance of the peremptory order passed by this Court on the notice. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party No.1 opposing the restoration. 7. Considering that for non-compliance of the peremptory order the said W.P. (C.) has been dismissed and that was not decided on merit and it has been pointed out that inadvertently the requisites have not been filed. 8. This Court finds that sufficient cause has been made out for the restoration of W.P.(C) No.2499 of 2015. As such W.P.(C) No.2499 of 2015 is hereby restored to its original file. 9. This C.M.P. is allowed and disposed of. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated 20.03.2026 Sangam/