Smt. Sona Gandharwa v. Sonsay Kevat

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Order Sheet MCC No. 234 of 2018

1. Smt. Sona Gandharwa Wd/o Late Gopal Gandharwa Aged About 30 Years R/o Matachoura Chowk, Matiyari, P.S. Sipat, Tehsil and District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Alok Gandharwa S/o Late Gopal Gandharwa Aged About 9 Years (Minor) through Natural Guardian Mother Appellant No.1 Sona Gandharwa, R/o Matachoura Chowk, Matiyari, P.S. Sipat, Tehsil and District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh,

3. Ravindra Gandharwa S/o Late Gopal Gandharwa Aged About 7 Years (Minor) through Natural Guardian Mother Appellant No.1 Sona Gandharwa, R/o Matachoura Chowk, Matiyari, P.S. Sipat, Tehsil And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh,

4. Smt. Ankala Bai, wife of late Anantram aged about 65 years (Dead) --- Applicants

Versus

1. Sonsay Kevat S/o Shri Punnulal Kevat Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Mohra, P.S. Sipat, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh (Driver, Vehicle No. Cg-12-E-7055), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

2. Smt. Indira Barua W/o Shri Suresh Barua R/o Junior Mig-1 Near Post Office, Rajkishor Nagar Bilaspur, Tehsil And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh (Owner, Vehicle No. CG 12 E 7055),

3. Shri Ram General Insurance Company Ltd. Rgd Off. E/8, E. P. I. P. Riico Industrial Area, Jaipur, (R. J) ..............Insurer, Vehicle No. C. G. 12 E 7055., District : Jaipur, Rajasthan --- Respondents 18.11.2021 Ms. Sonia Kuldeep, counsel for the Applicants. Mr. Anshuman Shrivastava, counsel for respondent no.1 and 2. Mr. Raghavendra Verma, on behalf of Deepak Gupta, counsel for respondent no.3.

Heard on I.A.No.1 for condonation of delay in filing the restoration application.

Learned counsel for the respondents have no objection. It appears that sufficient reasons have been assigned, therefore, the delay of 837 days in filing the restoration application is condoned. I.A.No.1 is allowed.

Heard on application for restoration of MA(C) No.728 of 2015, which has been dismissed for want of prosecution on 30.09.2015. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the matter has been

settled in Lok Adalat but because of the fact that the appeal has been dismissed for default, it could not be settled. Learned counsel for the respondents do not object to the restoration application.

On due consideration of the submission of learned counsel for the applicants and for the reasons stated in the restoration application, I am inclined to recall the order dated 30.09.2015 and allow the application. Accordingly, the order dated 30.09.2015 is recalled and MA(C) No.728/2015 is restored to its original number. Sd/- GOUTAM BHADURI JUDGE R a o