SMT. DAMINI DESHMUKH vs SANTOSH THAKUR — MAC/1973/2024

Status: Motion Hearing Matters. Next hearing: : -.

Motion Hearing Matters Next hearing —

CNR: CGHC010361032024

Filing Number

MAC/20680/2024

Filing Date

14-Oct-2024

Registration No

MAC/1973/2024

Registration Date

16-Oct-2024

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

COMPENSATION MATTERS ( 12 )

Sub-Category

MATTERS RELATING TO ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. ( 1204 )

Judicial Branch

Civil Section

Last updated 22-May-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SMT. DAMINI DESHMUKH

    Adv. S.B. PANDEY,ANJANA PANDEY,ANJANA PANDEY, ,RAMVALLABH PANDEY,Ritesh Verma,Ritesh Verma

  2. 2.Sajal Kumar Deshmukh

  3. 3.Ku. Dayji Deshmukh

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SANTOSH THAKUR

  2. 2.Nilesh Soni

  3. 3.Shiva Sudhakaran

Case History

  1. —

    Next hearingPending

  2. 15-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh RajputView PDF

    Summary: The High Court of Chhattisgarh admitted the appeal (MAC No. 1973/2024) filed by Smt. Damini Deshmukh against Santosh Thakur, condoning a 103-day delay in filing under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Notice was issued to respondents returnable within three weeks, and the record of the Claims Tribunal was called for. In a subsequent order dated 15/04/2026, the court noted that Respondent No. 2 had died and adjourned the matter by four weeks to allow the appellants' counsel to file an appropriate application. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 24-Oct-2024

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar ChandravanshiView PDF

  4. 18-Oct-2024

    For Orders [On Office Notes]

    Additional Registrar(j)

  5. 14-Oct-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. MAC/1973/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The High Court of Chhattisgarh admitted the appeal (MAC No. 1973/2024) filed by Smt. Damini Deshmukh against Santosh Thakur, condoning a 103-day delay in filing under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Notice was issued to respondents returnable within three weeks, and the record of the Claims Tribunal was called for. In a subsequent order dated 15/04/2026, the court noted that Respondent No. 2 had died and adjourned the matter by four weeks to allow the appellants' counsel to file an appropriate application. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case