Patna High Court

Rajendra PaswanversusPawan Kumar Chaurasia

Decided: 11 March 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: ANIL KUMAR SINHA

Holding

The court held that restoration cannot be allowed as the matter was not decided on merits and the petitioners may file a fresh application.

Summary

The petitioners filed an application seeking restoration of Civil Miscellaneous No. 546 of 2018, which had been dismissed as not pressed on 23.08.2022. They argued that the earlier counsel was appointed as an Additional District and Sessions Judge, preventing the case from being pressed, and now wish to pursue the matter with new counsel. The respondents contended that the dismissal was not for default but because the petitioners failed to press the case. The court examined the submissions and noted that the dismissal arose from the petitioners' inaction, not a substantive decision on merits. Consequently, the court refused to restore the case, directing the petitioners to file a fresh application if they wish to proceed.

Issues considered

Whether a civil miscellaneous proceeding dismissed as not pressed can be restored to its original file
Whether restoration is permissible when the dismissal was due to the petitioner's failure to press the case

Subjects

restoration of suit
civil miscellaneous jurisdiction
dismissal for non-pressing
fresh application
procedural law

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.56 of 2023
                                                         In
                       CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.546 of 2018
                 ======================================================
           1.     Rajendra Paswan S/o Late Sudum Pawan @ Sudum Lal Paswan R/o Village-
                  Baghiya, Jadiya, P.S.- Jadiya, District- Supaul
           2.    Upendra Paswan S/o Late Paanchu Paswan R/o Village- Baghiya, Jadiya,
                 P.S.- Jadiya, District- Supaul
           3.    Ashok Paswan S/o Uttim Paswan R/o Village- Baghiya, Jadiya, P.S.- Jadiya,
                 District- Supaul


                                                                            ... ... Petitioner/s

                                                  Versus

           1.    Pawan Kumar Chaurasia S/o Late Deonarayan Bhagat x
           2.    Arun Kumar Chaurasia S/o Late Deonarayan Bhagat x
           3.    Kavita Devi D/o Late Deonarayan Bhagat x
           4.    Shivpujan Bhagat S/o Jamun Bhagat R/o - Bhagheli Post- Mahrampur, P.S.-
                 Jadiya, District- Supaul
           5.    Raghunath Bhagat S/o Jamun Bhagat R/o - Bhagheli Post- Mahrampur, P.S.-
                 Jadiya, District- Supaul
           6.    Most. Sudamiya Devi W/o Late Parmeshwari Paswan R/o Idgah Navtolia,
                 P.S.- Farwisganj, District- Araria
           7.    Subodh Paswan S/o Parmeshwari Paswan R/o Idgah Navtolia, P.S.-
                 Farwisganj, District- Araria


                                                                      ... ... Opposite Party/s

                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :   Mr. Parth Gaurav
                 For the Opposite Party/s :   Mr. Chandra Mauli Chaurasia
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
                                       ORAL ORDER

5   11-03-2026         1. Heard Mr. Parth Gaurav, learned counsel for the

                           petitioners and Mr. Chandra Mauli Chaurasia, learned

                           counsel for the respondents.
Patna High Court MJC No.56 of 2023(5) dt.11-03-2026
                                            2/3




              2. The present application has been filed for restoration

                  of C. Misc. No. 546 of 2018, which was dismissed as

                  not pressed vide order dated 23.08.2022.

              3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

                  counsel appearing for the petitioners in the aforesaid

                  case, Mr. Rakesh Chandra, was selected as an

                  Additional District and Sessions Judge in the State of

                  Jharkhand. Accordingly, C. Misc. No. 546 of 2018

                  was not pressed by the learned counsel at that time.

                  However, the petitioners have now approached the

                  present counsel and are willing to pursue the matter.

                  Therefore, it is prayed that C. Misc. No. 546 of 2018

                  may be restored to its original file and number.

              4. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the

                  case was not dismissed for default; rather, it was not

                  pressed by the petitioners.

              5. Considering the rival submissions of the parties and

                  taking into consideration the fact that the petition was

                  not pressed by the petitioners, which led to the

                  dismissal of the application, this Court is of the view

                  that the present restoration application cannot be
           Patna High Court MJC No.56 of 2023(5) dt.11-03-2026
                                                       3/3




                             allowed. Since the issue was not decided on merits by

                             this Court, the petitioners shall be at liberty to file a

                             fresh application against the impugned order.



                                              (Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
Siwani/-

U

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…