Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Kiran Choudhary @ Kiran DeviversusThe State of Bihar through Collector

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The second appeal is restored to its original file.

Summary

The petitioner filed an application seeking restoration of Second Appeal No. 519 of 1991, which had been dismissed for non‑prosecution on 17‑Oct‑2022. The petitioner’s counsel demonstrated that the cost payable to the opposite parties (Nos. 2 & 3) had been paid and the opposite parties acknowledged receipt. The State and the opposite parties raised no objection to the restoration. The court found the reasons and submissions in the application sufficient to grant relief. Consequently, the court restored the second appeal to its original file and disposed of the application.

Issues considered

  • Whether a second appeal dismissed for non‑prosecution can be restored upon payment of costs and without objection from the parties

Subjects

  • restoration of appeal
  • non‑prosecution
  • cost payment
  • procedural law
  • High Court

Judgment

                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2753 of 2023
                                                        In
                                      SECOND APPEAL No.519 of 1991
                  ======================================================
                  Kiran Choudhary @ Kiran Devi Wife of Bhairab Nath Choudhary, permanent
                  Resident of Village- Pothia, P.S. - Sanhaula, District - Bhagalpur, previously
                  residing at Kumardhubi, Nirsa cum Chirkunda, P.S. - Nirsa, District -
                  Dhanbad (Jharkhand).

                                                                              ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus
            1.    The State of Bihar through Collector Bhagalpur.
            2.    Bijoy Krishna Thakur, Son of Ganesh Thakur, Resident of Village -
                  Sarbhanga, P.S.- Mahgama, District - Godda, Jharkhand(Now District -
                  Godda, Jharkhand)
            3.    Sudhansu Kumar Choudhary, Son of Digambar Kumar Choudhary, Resident
                  of Village- Pothia, P.S.- Sanhaula, District - Bhagalpur.

                                                         ... ... Opposite Party/s
                  ======================================================
                  Appearance :
                  For the Petitioner/s   :      Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, Advocate.
                  For the State          :      Mr. Kameshwar Prasad Gupta, GP-10.
                                                Ms. Deepanjali Gupta, AC to GP-10.
                  For the O.P. Nos.2 & 3 :      Mr. Dhirendra Nath Jha, Advocate.
                  ======================================================
                  CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA
                                        ORAL ORDER

16   03-04-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

                    counsel for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party

                    nos.2 & 3.

                                  2. This application has been filed for restoration of

                    Second Appeal No.519 of 1991, which stood dismissed due to

                    non-prosecution on 17.10.2022.

                                  3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he

                    has already made payment of the cost to the opposite party nos.2

                    & 3 and learned counsel for the opposite party nos.2 & 3 had
          Patna High Court MJC No.2753 of 2023(16) dt.03-04-2026
                                                      2/2




                    conceded that he had received the payment of cost.

                                 4. Learned counsel for the State and learned counsel

                    for the opposite party nos.2 & 3 have no objection to this

                    petition.

                                 5. The reasons stated in the restoration application and

                    the submissions made in support thereof are sufficient to allow

                    the application.

                                 6. In view of the submission of the learned counsel for

                    the parties and considering the averments made in the

                    application, the instant application is allowed and the Second

                    Appeal No.519 of 1991 is restored to its original file.

                                 7. This Application is, accordingly, disposed of.



                                            (Sunil Dutta Mishra, J)
Ritik/-

U


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.