1 CGHC010309562026 2026:CGHC:38056 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCC No. 792 of 2026 Goutam Meshram S/o Thanwar Meshram Aged About 46 Years R/o Kumarda, Tehsil Chhuriya, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Petitioner. Versus 1 - Tara Bai D/o Sitaram W/o Sunderlal Chandrikapure, R/o Shikari Baba Ward No. 05, Dalli, Rajhara, District Balod, Chhattisgarh. ---Through The Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI General Power Of Attorney Holder Smt, Shanti Bai Gajbhiye Wife Of DN: cn=AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, ou=HIGH COURT, o=HIGH COURT OF Nandkishore Gajabhiya, Aged About 63 Years R/o Station Para, Ward No. 13, CHHATTISGARH, st=Chhattisgarh, c=IN Date: 2026.08.25 Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 17:07:00 +0530 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector Rajnandgoan District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Respondents. (cause title downloaded from CIS Periphery) For Petitioner : Mr. Pramod Ramteke, Advocate. For Res No.2/State : Mr. Vikhyat Arora, Panel Lawyer. (Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi ) Order on Board 25/08/2026 1. Heard on IA No.1/2026 – Application for condonation of delay. 2. Considering the reasons assigned in the application and short delay of 5 days, IA No.1 is allowed. Delay in filing the MCC is condoned. 2 3. Heard on application for restoration of MCC No.945/2025 (Goutam Meshram Vs. Tara Bai and another) which for non-compliance of order dated 22.06.2026, on 06.07.2026.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that due to inadvertence, he could not cure the default within the stipulated, due to which, the original MCC was dismissed, which is bona fide and not intentional. 5. Taking into consideration the submission of learned counsel for the applicant and the reasons assigned in the application, I am inclined to allow the instant MCC. 6. Accordingly, the MCC is allowed. MCC No.945/2025 (Goutam Meshram Vs. Tara Bai and another) be restored to its original number and be listed for hearing as per roster. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Ajay

1 CGHC010309562026 2026:CGHC:38056 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCC No. 792 of 2026 Goutam Meshram S/o Thanwar Meshram Aged About 46 Years R/o Kumarda, Tehsil Chhuriya, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Petitioner. Versus 1 - Tara Bai D/o Sitaram W/o Sunderlal Chandrikapure, R/o Shikari Baba Ward No. 05, Dalli, Rajhara, District Balod, Chhattisgarh. ---Through The Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI General Power Of Attorney Holder Smt, Shanti Bai Gajbhiye Wife Of DN: cn=AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, ou=HIGH COURT, o=HIGH COURT OF Nandkishore Gajabhiya, Aged About 63 Years R/o Station Para, Ward No. 13, CHHATTISGARH, st=Chhattisgarh, c=IN Date: 2026.08.25 Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 17:07:00 +0530 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector Rajnandgoan District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Respondents. (cause title downloaded from CIS Periphery) For Petitioner : Mr. Pramod Ramteke, Advocate. For Res No.2/State : Mr. Vikhyat Arora, Panel Lawyer. (Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi ) Order on Board 25/08/2026 1. Heard on IA No.1/2026 – Application for condonation of delay. 2. Considering the reasons assigned in the application and short delay of 5 days, IA No.1 is allowed. Delay in filing the MCC is condoned. 2 3. Heard on application for restoration of MCC No.945/2025 (Goutam Meshram Vs. Tara Bai and another) which for non-compliance of order dated 22.06.2026, on 06.07.2026.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that due to inadvertence, he could not cure the default within the stipulated, due to which, the original MCC was dismissed, which is bona fide and not intentional. 5. Taking into consideration the submission of learned counsel for the applicant and the reasons assigned in the application, I am inclined to allow the instant MCC. 6. Accordingly, the MCC is allowed. MCC No.945/2025 (Goutam Meshram Vs. Tara Bai and another) be restored to its original number and be listed for hearing as per roster. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Ajay