Chhattisgarh High Court
MCC/910/2026 of RAJAT CHANDRAKAR Vs ABHAYRAJ SHARMA on 28 September 2026
2026:CGHC:42309 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCC No. 910 of 2026 1 - Rajat Chandrakar S/o Jitendra Chandrakar, Aged About 30 Years R/o Ward No. 03, Near Sani Temple, Radhika Nagar, Supela, Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh (Owner Of Vehicle C.G. 07 MA 7521) 2 - Sangam
CGHC010374482026
2026:CGHC:42309
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCC No. 910 of 2026
1 - Rajat Chandrakar S/o Jitendra Chandrakar, Aged About 30 Years R/o Ward No. 03, Near Sani Temple, Radhika Nagar, Supela, Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh (Owner Of Vehicle C.G. 07 MA 7521)
2 - Sangam Chandrakar, S/o Jitendra Chandrakar, Aged About 34 Years R/o Idgah Bhata, Ward No. 4, Mahasamund, Police Station Kotwali District - Mahasamund Chhattisgarh (Owner Of Vehicle C.G. 07 MA 7521)
... Applicants
versus
1 - Abhayraj Sharma S/o Late Manshukh Lal Sharma Aged About 53 Years R/o House No. 81 (02), Azad Chowk, Birgaon, Police Station - Urla, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
2 - Smt. Ramlali Sharma W/o Abhayraj Sharma Aged About 50 Years R/o House No. 81 (02), Azad Chowk, Birgaon, Police Station - Urla, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
3 - Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, Through Its Branch Manager, Office Address - Office No. 516, Fifth Floor, National Corporate Park, G.E. Road, Raipur, District -Raipur, Chhattisgarh
... Respondents
For Applicants
:
Mr. Gurudev I. Sharan, Advocate
For Respondents No.1 and 2
:
Mr. A.L. Singroul, Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay
Kumar Jaiswal
Order on Board
(29/09/2026)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard on I.A. No.01/2026, an application for condonation of delay.
2. MAC No. 891/2024, being an appeal preferred by the owner-driver, was dismissed for non-prosecution on 05.08.2026. The present MCC has been filed seeking restoration of the said appeal. There is a delay of 16 days in filing the present MCC.
3. For the reasons assigned therein, I am inclined to allow the same and delay of 16 days in preferring of this application is, hereby, condoned.
4. I.A. No.01/2026, thus, stands disposed of.
5. Also heard on admission.
6. Admit.
7. With the consent of learned counsel appearing for both the parties, the present MCC is heard finally.
8. As there was no appearance on behalf of the appellants on 05.08.2026 and on the previous occasion, i.e., 24.07.2026, the matter was dismissed for non-prosecution.
9. Learned counsel appearing for Respondents No. 1 and 2 has raised an objection to the restoration of MAC No. 891/2024.
10. In MAC No. 891/2024, the stay application preferred by the Appellant– Driver/Owner was allowed on 10.06.2024, subject to the condition that 50% of the awarded amount would be deposited within a period of 45 days. However, no amount has been deposited by the Appellant till date. It is pertinent to note that the accident occurred on 15.02.2020 and the Award was passed on 31.01.2024, despite the lapse of considerable time, the claimants have not received any amount till date.
11. From the record, it appears that the Appellant–Driver/Owner has neither complied with the direction of this Court nor shown any diligence in pursuing the matter through learned counsel. In the circumstances, the present MCC is allowed subject to payment of costs of Rs.40,000/-in favour of any of the claimants by cheque before the concerned Claims Tribunal, within a period of 21 days from today.
12. Accordingly, the prayer for restoration of the instant appeal is allowed and MAC No.891/2024 is restored to its original number, subject to payment of costs of Rs. 40,000/-.
13. Accordingly, the MCC is disposed of.
Sd/-
(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal)
Judge Prashant