1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.40 OF 2009 IN MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APLICATION NO.23 OF 2009 Kishore K Mehta : Applicant. Versus Mrs.Rekhaben H Sheth and ors. : Respondents. Shri Venkatesh Dhond a/w Raj Patel & Anoshek Daver & Rizvi Naser Ali & H.N.T. I/by M/s.Thakore Jariwala & Associates for the Applicant. Ms.R C Nichani a/w Mr.Shane Sapeco a/w Mr.Amit Kanani i/by Hariani & Co. for the Respondent Nos.9 and 10 Mr.Jay Kansara i/by Paras Kuhad & Associates for Respondent Nos.4 & 5 Ms Sneha Madiner i/by Dinesh Tiwari & Associates for the Respondent No.11. Shri Sanjay Jain i/by Wadhia Gandhy & Co. for Respondent No. 10. CORAM : R.M.SAVANT, J. DATED : MARCH 20, 2009 P.C. 1. Leave to amend so as to number the prayers as (a) to (e) is granted. Amendment to be carried out forthwith. 2. By the above Civil Application, the Applicant prays for 2 restoration of the Misc. Civil Application No.23 of 2009 which has been dismissed for non-prosecution against Respondent Nos.1 to 9, 11 & 12 on account of the conditional order dated 24/02/2009. By the said conditional order, the Applicant was directed to file affidavit of service before the returnable date i.e. 16th March 2009. On failure of the Applicant to do so, the conditional order became operative and the above Misc. Civil Application came to be dismissed against the Respondent Nos. 1 to 9, 11 & 12. It is the case of the Applicant that the said Respondents were served but the affidavit of service was sought to be filed on 16th March 2009 on a misunderstanding that it was to be filed by the said date. 3. Having heard the learned counsel in my view case for restoration is made out. The Civil Application is accordingly allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b). Resultantly, the Misc.Civil Application No.23 of 2009 is restored against the Respondent Nos.1 to 9, 11 & 12. 4. The above Civil Application is accordingly disposed of. 3 [R.M.SAVANT, J]