1 vks IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FRFOM ORDER NO.1250 OF 2009 Umaprasad G Maji .. Appellant -versus Mumbai Housing and Area Development Board and anr .. Respondents. Mr. A. M. Sarogi, for the Appellant. Mr. A.R. Patil, AGP for MHADA Mr. K.K. Sorean, for the Respondent Corporation. CORAM: R. C. CHAVAN, J. DATED: 9th AUGUST, 2010 P.C. 1. This appeal is directed against the order passed by the learned Judge, City Civil Court, Mumbai, rejecting the appellant’s notice of Notion NO.356 of 2009, whereby appellant sought restoration of suit No.4733 of 2001 which has been dismissed in default. 2. Ordinarily if a client seeks restoration on the ground that his advocate failed to appear before the Court, either the client must report the matter to the Bar Council or ask advocate himself to file Motion for restoration indicating that there was lapse AO1250PF2009.sxw 2 on his part. Such course has not been adopted. All the same it is always desirable to have the suit to be decided on merits. The learned Judge could have allowed the Notice of Motion for restoration subject to heavy costs. Since the lapse on the part of appellant has led to the present respondents being dragged to this Court, this appeal is allowed subject to appellant’s depositing costs in the sum of Rs.l0,000/- in the Trial Court, within a period of two weeks which may be withdrawn by the respondent No.l. 3. If the costs are not deposited within a period of two weeks, the appeal shall deemed to have been dismissed. 4. Upon depositing the costs, the suit shall be restored. 5. Appeal from Order stands disposed of . (R.C. CHAVAN, J.) AO1250PF2009.sxw