SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND - PRINCIPAL BENCH JHARKHAND
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HAZARIBAGH – Appellant
Versus
SARLU OHDAR – Respondent
C.M.P. 330/2018



Advocates:
['AANYA', '', 'PRAVEEN AKHOURI', 'JITESH KUMAR']

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

C.M.P. No. 330 of 2018

Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh

… Petitioner

Versus

Sarlu Ohdar & Ors.

Opposite Parties

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

For the Petitioner

: Mr. Sharahbil Ahmed, A.C. to S.C. Mines I

For the opposite parties

: Mr. Jitesh Kumar, Adv.

05 / 04.02.2022

Heard the parties through Video Conferencing.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

this petition has been filed to restore F.A. No. 185 of 2012 to its

original file. It is next submitted that the said F.A. No. 185 of 2012

was dismissed because of non-compliance of the peremptory order

to remove the defects within six weeks and the only defect to be

removed was to pay the requisite court fees which could not be

removed within the stipulated time. It is further submitted that

the petitioner has very good grounds to agitate in this case and

unless the same is restored to its original file, the petitioner will be

highly prejudiced. Hence, it is submitted that F.A. No. 185 of 2012

be restored to its original file.

Learned counsel for the opposite party on the other

hand vehemently opposes the prayer for restoration of F.A. No.

185 of 2012 and submits that the State is deliberately harassing the

opposite parties by not paying the land acquisition compensation

without any plausible reason and taking the plea that the matter is

pending before the Court, hence, the opposite parties have

suffered huge amount of loss because of delay occasioned in

payment of land acquisition compensation awarded, hence, the

opposite parties be compensated by adequate costs.

Considering the aforesaid submission of the learned

counsels, F.A. No. 185of 2012 is restored to its original file subject

to petitioner paying the cost of Rs. 20,000/- to the opposite parties

through the counsel appearing in the record within four weeks,

failing which, this conditional order shall not be given effect to and

this civil miscellaneous petition shall stand dismissed without

further reference to the Bench.

In case, the petitioner files the proof of payment of cost

of Rs. 20,000/- to the opposite parties through the counsel

appearing in the record within four weeks, F.A. No. 185 of 2012

shall be listed at the stage, at which it was before its dismissal,

after one week from the date of filing of proof of payment of the

costs.

This civil miscellaneous petition is disposed of

accordingly.

(ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.)

Smita/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top