IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRI.APPR NO.9/2009 IN CRI.APPR NO.8/2009 IN CRI.REVN.NO.189 OF 2004(D) (LAXMAN WASUDEO NIMJE VS. SUNITA LAXMAN NIMJE & 2 OTH.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Shri A.H.Jamal, Advocate for Applicant. Shri Sandeep Singh h/f. Shri A.K. Choube, Adv. Respondents No.1 & 2. Shri D.B. Yengal, A.P. P. for Respondent No.3. CORAM : A.H.JOSHI, J. DATED : NOVEMBER 20, 2009. 1. Heard. 2. Delay of 316 days is caused in filing application for restoration of Criminal Revision Application No.189 of 2004. The reason towards delay, as assigned in the application, is satisfactory. 3. Delay of 316 days, caused in filing the application for restoration, is condoned. JUDGE RR. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRI.APPR NO.8/2009 IN CRI.REVN.NO.189 OF 2004(D) (LAXMAN WASUDEO NIMJE VS. SUNITA LAXMAN NIMJE & 2 OTH.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Shri A.H.Jamal, Advocate for Applicant. Shri Sandeep Singh h/f. Shri A.K. Choube, Adv. Respondents No.1 & 2. Shri D.B. Yengal, A.P. P. for Respondent No.3. CORAM : A.H.JOSHI, J. DATED : NOVEMBER 20, 2009. 1. Heard. 2. By this application the applicant seeks restoration of Criminal Revision Application No.189 of 2004. 3. Learned Advocate Shri Jamal agrees to the position that it is impossible to make out from the pursis as to who is learned Advocate signing, as it does not bear name of Advocate and it was obvious that the Court may have committed mistake in reading the name. 4. Learned Advocate Shri Jamal states that the Court has noted discharge of Advocate Shri Jamal. It is stated that in fact, withdrawal pursis is signed by Shri A.J. Khan. 5. The reason assigned by the learned Advocate which has led to dismissal of case and towards his absence is plausible. 6. This Court is of the view that technicalities ought not override the justice. 7. The application for restoration is, therefore, allowed. Criminal Revision Application No.189 of 2004 is restored to file. JUDGE RR. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRI.APPR. NO. 77 OF 2009 IN CRI.APPR NO.9/2009 IN CRI.APPR NO.8/2009 IN CRI.REVN.NO.189 OF 2004(D) (LAXMAN WASUDEO NIMJE VS. SUNITA LAXMAN NIMJE & 2 OTH.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Shri A.H.Jamal, Advocate for Applicant. Shri Sandeep Singh h/f. Shri A.K. Choube, Adv. Respondents No.1 & 2. Shri D.B. Yengal, A.P. P. for Respondent No.3. CORAM : A.H.JOSHI, J. DATED : NOVEMBER 20, 2009. 1. Heard. 2. This application was filed in Criminal Application No.9 of 2009. 3. Today, this Court has passed order in Criminal Application No.9 of 2009 and Criminal Application No.8 of 2009. Now, Criminal Revision Application No.189 of 2004 has revived. 4. In the interest of justice, it would be appropriate to keep the order passed in Criminal Application No. 77 of 2009 in abeyance. JUDGE RR.