Jharkhand High Court
C.M.P./810/2024 of RAJIV RAJNISH Vs DENA BANK (NOW BANK OF BARODA), THROUGH ITS ZONAL MANAGER on 15 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No.810 of 2024 Rajiv Rajnish, aged about 41 years, husband of Late Silky Kumari, resident of Jharia, P.O. and P.S. – Jharia, Dist.- Dhanbad (Jharkhand) … Petitioner Versus 1. Dena Bank (Now Bank of Baroda), through its Zonal Manager, Patna
2026:JHHC:27831-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
C.M.P. No.810 of 2024
Rajiv Rajnish, aged about 41 years, husband of Late Silky Kumari, resident of Jharia, P.O. and P.S. –
Jharia, Dist.- Dhanbad (Jharkhand) … Petitioner
Versus
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. Dena Bank (Now Bank of Baroda), through its Zonal Manager, Patna Zone, 1st Floor, Hotel Satkar Premises, Dak Banglow, Chauraha, Frazer Road, Patna (Bihar)
2. The Assistant General Manager (H.R.M.), Dena Bank (Now Bank of Baroda), Head Office, Dena Corporate Centre, 3rd Floor, C-10, G–Block, Bandra-Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), P.O.–Bandra, P.S.-Bandra (East), Mumbai (Maharashtra) 400051
… Opp. Parties
---------- Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI
-------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Ramchander Sahu, Advocate For the O.Ps. : Mrs. Priyanka Boby, Advocate
-----
Order No.10/Dated: 15.09.2026
1. The instant petition has been filed for the restoration of Letters Patent Appeal being, L.P.A. No. 464 of 2023 which has been dismissed for non-prosecution vide order dated 20th August, 2024.
2. The reason has been assigned in the instant petition that on the day when the case was listed on Board, the Advocate-on-record was suffering from cough and fever and, as such, could not come to the Court and thus when the case was called out, there was no appearance on his behalf on that day.
2026:JHHC:27831-DB
3. It has been submitted that if the Letters Patent Appeal is not restored to its original file, then the petitioner will suffer an irreparable loss and injury.
4. Mrs. Priyanka Boby, learned counsel has put her appearance on behalf of the opposite parties.
5. This Court having heard the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the reasons assigned in the paragraphs of the instant petition, is of the view that the Letters Patent Appeal being, L.P.A. No. 464 of 2023 is to be restored to its original file.
6. Considering the aforesaid fact, the instant petition is allowed.
7. L.P.A. No. 464 of 2023 is restored to its original file.
8. Accordingly, C.M.P. No. 810 of 2024 stands disposed of.
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)
(Arun Kumar Rai, J.) 15th September, 2026 R.K/Rajnish Uploaded on