Madhya Pradesh High Court
Jasrath (Lrs Of Parmi W/O Gansu@ Ghansu ... vs Ramdayal(Dead) Lrs Maththu Bai on 3 August, 2022
Author: Atul Sreedharan
Bench: Atul Sreedharan
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ATUL SREEDHARAN
ON THE 3rd OF AUGUST, 2022
MISC. CIVIL CASE No. 452 of 2022
Between:-
JASRATH (LRS OF PARMI W/O GANSU@
GHANSU LODHI) S/O LATE GANSU @ GHANSU
LODHI OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE R/O DOH
TAHSIL BALDEOGARH DISTRICT TIKAMGARH
MADHYA PRDESH (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPLICANT
(BY SHRI J. P. SINGROL, LEARNED COUNSEL)
AND
1. RAMDAYAL(DEAD) LRS MATHTHU BAI W/O
LATE SHRI RAMDAYAL LODHI OCCUPATION:
NIL R/O VILLAGE DOH TAHSIL BALDEOGARH
DISTRICT TIKAMGARH M.P. (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. GORELAL S/O RAMDAYAL LODHI
OCCUPATION: NILL R/O VILLAGE DOH, TEHSIL-
BALDEOGARH, TIKAMGARH, M.P. (MADHYA
PRADESH)
3. GOKUL S/O LATE RAMDAYAL LODHI
OCCUPATION: NILL R/O VILLAGE DOH, TEHSIL-
BALDEOGARH, TIKAMGARH, M.P. (MADHYA
PRADESH)
4. DHARAMDAS S/O LATE RAMDAYAL LODHI
OCCUPATION: NILL R/O VILLAGE DOH, TEHSIL-
BALDEOGARH, TIKAMGARH, M.P. (MADHYA
PRADESH)
5. HARCHARAN S/O LATE RAMDAYAL LODHI
OCCUPATION: NILL R/O VILLAGE DOH, TEHSIL-
BALDEOGARH, TIKAMGARH, M.P. (MADHYA
PRADESH)
6. SMT. LALLE BAI (DIED) THROUGH LRS
GOVERDHAN S/O RAGHUNATH LODHI
OCCUPATION: NILL R/O VILLAGE HALLAI,
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PRASHANT
SHRIVASTAVA
Signing time: 8/4/2022
12:09:07 PM
2
TEHSIL- BALDEOGARH, TIKAMGARH, M.P.
(MADHYA PRADESH)
7. TULSIDAR S/O GOERDHAN LODHI
OCCUPATION: NILL R/O VILLAGE HALLAI,
TEHSIL- BALDEOGARH, TIKAMGARH, M.P.
(MADHYA PRADESH)
8. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
COLLECTOR TIKAMGARH TIKAMGARH,
MADHYA PRADESH (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(RESPONDENT NOS.2, 3, 4 AND 5 BY SHRI SAKET AGRAWAL,
LEARNED COUNSEL AND RESPONDENT NO.8-STATE BY SHRI
MANOJ KUMAR SINGH, LEARNED PANEL LAWYER)
This application coming on for orders this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
The present petition has been filed for restoration of Second Appeal No.641/2010, which was dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 24.2.20216.
Heard on I.A. No.2060/2022, which is an application for condonation of delay.
The said application is perfunctory and does not give any satisfactory reason as to why the petition has been filed after a delay of 2164 days or more than five years.
Therefore, on the grounds of inordinate delay, I.A. No.2060/2022 is rejected and the delay is not condoned.
Consequently, the MCC also stands dismissed.
(ATUL SREEDHARAN) JUDGE ps Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRASHANT SHRIVASTAVA Signing time: 8/4/2022 12:09:07 PM 3 Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRASHANT SHRIVASTAVA Signing time: 8/4/2022 12:09:07 PM