State of Chhattisgarh Another v. D.D. Rai Another. APPLICATION FOR RECALLING OF ORDER AND RESTORATION Appearance
Judgment
D.B.: HON'BLE MR. SUNIL KUMAR SINHA & HON'BLE MR. RADHE SHYAM SHARMA, JJ. h^~ APPLICANTS RESPONDENTS M.C.C.N0.870F2013 State of Chhattisgarh & Another. Versus D.D. Rai & Another. APPLICATION FOR RECALLING OF ORDER AND RESTORATION Appearance: Mr. Akhil Mishra, Dy. Govt. Advocate and Mr. Majeet Ali, Advocate for the respective Appliants. Heardonl.A.No. 01/2013. ORDER (22.03.2013) This is an application for condonation of delay in filing the M.C.C. On due consideration of the submissions made by counsel for the Applicants and the grounds taken in the application, we are satisfied that the applicants has shown sufficient cause for not filing the M.C.C in time, and the delay in filing the M.C.C deserves to be condoned. IA.No. 01/2013 allowed. Delay condoned. Heard on M.C.C. No. 87/2013. The Applicants are praying for recalling the order dated 15th of March, 2012 passed in Writ Appeal No. 43/2012 and restoration of the said writ appeal. Learned counsel for the Applicants submit that the above writ appeal was withdrawn on the wrong impression that another writ appeal relating to the same order was already filed. In fact, it was a bunch of 132 matters, therefore, inadvertently by the above bonafide mistake, the writ appeal was withdrawn. However, later on it was \ ir- ^.^^^--^^i^i^^;::;:.: m^:^ ^ M.C.C.No. 87/2013 found that no writ appeal relating to the said impugned order (subject matter of the writ appeal) was earlier filed. The application is supported by the suitable affidavit. On due consideration of the submissions made by counsel for the Applicants L and the grounds taken in the application, we are satisfied that the above writ appeal was withdrawn under a wrong impression, therefore, withdrawal order deserves to be recalled. M.C.C. No. 87/2013, therefore, is allowed. Order of withdrawal dated 15th of March, 2012 passed in W.A. No. 43/2012 is recalled. The above writ Appeal restored to its original number. Sd/. Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge ^^ Sd/- R.S. Sharma Judge w^K-— "-''^'-^—t—-
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.