The court established that a party can seek restoration of an appeal dismissed for want of prosecution if they adequately challenge the dismissal and present a valid reason for non-appearance.

O R D E R

1. Leave granted

2. Heard Mr. Rajive Bhalla, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. Shaurya Sahay, learned counsel appearing for the State of Uttar Pradesh.

3. Against the order passed by the Collector, determining the deficiency in payment of stamp duty in respect of a sale deed, a Stamp Appeal No.75 of 2007-2008, ‘M/s. Radha Krishna Enterprises vs. State of U.P.’ was filed before the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh. The said appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 04.11.2008. The appellant applied for the recall of the above order, but the said application was also rejected vide order dated

29.09.2010.

4. Not satisfied by the above orders, the appellant Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by geeta ahuja Date: 2025.03.05 invoked the writ jurisdiction of the High Court and filed

10:09:58 IST Reason:

Writ- C No.66010 of 2010 inter alia praying for the quashing of the order dated 16.08.2007 passed by the Collector; for the quashing of the order dated 29.09.2010 passed by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Allahabad, rejecting the appellant’s application for restoration of the appeal. A third prayer was made for the restoration of the Appeal No.75/2007-2008 to its original number for decision on merits.

5. The High Court by the impugned order dated 05.08.2024 has dismissed the above writ petition holding that the appellant has not challenged the finding recorded while rejecting the restoration/recall application.

6. We have considered the averments made in the recall/restoration application as well as in the writ petition filed by the appellant. We are more than satisfied that the appellant has challenged the rejection of the restoration application as well as the order dismissing the appeal in default. The appellant has made out a case for non-appearance when the appeal was dismissed in default.

7. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned orders dated 05.08.2024 passed by the High Court as well as the orders dated 29.09.2010 and 04.11.2008 passed by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh dismissing the appellant’s appeal for want of prosecution and the application for restoration.

8. The appeal is allowed.

9. The Stamp Appeal No.75/2007-2008 is restored on the file of the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh for decision afresh on merits.

10. It is expected that the above appeal would be decided most expeditiously.

11. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

.......................J.

(PANKAJ MITHAL)

.......................J.

(S.V.N. BHATTI)

NEW DELHI

28th FEBRUARY, 2025 GA ITEM NO.59 COURT NO.15 SECTION XI S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PETITION(S) FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (C) NO(S). 21883/2024 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-08-2024 in WRITC No. 66010/2010 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad]

M/S RADHA KRISHNA ENTERPRISES PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR. RESPONDENT(S)

(IA No. 214910/2024 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.)

Date : 28-02-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ MITHAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.V.N. BHATTI For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Rajive Bhalla, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Abhinav Ramkrishna, AOR Mr. Vasu Goyal, Adv.

Ms. Samina Thakur, Adv.

Ms. Anjali Chauhan, Adv.

For Respondent(s) :Mr. Shaurya Sahay, AOR Mr. Aditya Kumar, Adv.

Ms. Ruchil Raj, Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel the court made the following

O R D E R

1. Leave granted.

2. The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order.

Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

(Ram Subhag Singh) (Geeta Ahuja)

Assistant Registrar Assistant Registrar-cum-PS (Signed Order is placed on the file)