[2026:JHHC:4096]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No.499 of 2023 ------

1. Indra Deo, aged about 52 years, S/o Late Karu Rai, Resident of Village Porkhama, P.O., P.S. Sonarai Tharai, Sub Division and District Deoghar

2. Piyari Rai, Aged 20 years, S/o Late Matuki Rai, Resident of Village Uppergargaria, P.O., P.S. Sonarai Tharai, Sub Division and District Deoghar … Petitioners Versus

1. Bichu Rai, S/o Kashi Rai

2. Smt. Taro Devi, W/o Bichu Rai

3. Lalit Rai, minor son of Bichu Rai, represented by his father and natural guardian Bichu Rai All Resident of Village Uppergargaria, P.O., P.S. Sonarai Tharai, Sub Division and District Deoghar … Opposite Parties ------

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------

For the Petitioners : Ms. Vani Kumari, Advocate Ms. Jagriti, Advocate For the Opp. Parties : Mr. Niranjan Kumar, Advocate ------

Order No:-06 Dated-13-02-2026 I.A. No.11187 of 2023 Heard the parties.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this interlocutory application has been filed with the prayer to condone the delay of 238 days in filing the instant C.M.P. It is further submitted that this C.M.P. has been filed for readmission of the Second Appeal No.192 of 2007 to its original file. It is next submitted that the counsel for the appellants has been elevated as Judge of this Court, hence, when the case was called out, he could not appear as he became a Judge of this Court, therefore, the said Second Appeal stood dismissed and by the time the petitioners could know about the dismissal of the Second Appeal, the delay had already occurred. It is next submitted that the delay caused in filing the instant C.M.P. is neither deliberate nor intentional. It is next submitted that the petitioners have very good grounds to agitate in the said Second Appeal No.192 of 2007 and unless the delay in filing the instant C.M.P. is condoned, the petitioners will be highly prejudiced. Hence, it is submitted that the delay of 238 days in filing the instant C.M.P., be condoned.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the delay of 238 days in filing the instant C.M.P. is condoned.

Accordingly, this interlocutory application stands allowed.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.

C.M.P. No.499 of 2023 This civil miscellaneous petition has been filed by the petitioners with the prayer for readmission of Second Appeal No.192 of 2007 to its original file which stood dismissed for non-prosecution on 04.08.2022.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the counsel for the appellants has been elevated as Judge of this Court, hence, when the said Second Appeal No.192 of 2007, was called out he could not appear before this Court as he became a Judge of this Court, therefore, the said Second Appeal stood dismissed for non-prosecution. It is next submitted that non- prosecution before this Court on 04.08.2022 was neither deliberate nor intentional. It is also submitted that the petitioners have very good grounds to agitate in the said Second Appeal No.192 of 2007 and unless the same is readmitted to its original file, the petitioners will be highly prejudiced. Hence, it is submitted that the Second Appeal No.192 of 2007 be readmitted to its original file.

Learned counsels appearing for the respondents have not raised any serious objection.

Considering the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners, Second Appeal No.192 of 2007 is directed to be readmitted to its original file at the same stage at which it was before its dismissal.

Registry is directed to list Second Appeal No.192 of 2007 before the concerned Bench after a week.

This civil miscellaneous petition is disposed of accordingly.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.

Dated- 13.02.2026-Animesh/