;-;-^ ^ APPLICANTS IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.C.C.No. 154 OF201KS.B.) (Arisine out ofW. P. No. 20/1996) ^^.-IB ©Qrl0; 1. M/s. Korba Chemicals, Korba, A firm Registered under Indian Partnership Act Carrying on business of Manufacture and sale of Alum both ferric & Non- Ferric through its partner Sanjay Agarwal, S/o. Shri G.S. Agarwal, aged about 24 years, R/o. G. S. House Korba, District Bilaspur (now District Korba) Madhya Pradesh (Now Chhattisgarh). ^\,:^ ^^^' ^^<y ^^"0°)' •^ 2. Sanjay Agarwal, S/o. Shri G.S. Agarwal, aged about24years, R/o. G. S. House, Korba, District Bilaspur (Now District Korba) Madhya Pradesh (Now Chhattisgarh). VERSUS ^^ NON-APPLICANT 1. State of Madhya Pradesh, (Now Chhattisgarh), Through It?s Managing Director, Finance, House A.B. Road; Indore, (M. P.) 2. Regional Manager, Madhya Pradesh Financial Corporation, Regional Office, Norm.al School Road, Bilaspur (M. P.) 3. Smt. Renu Devi Agarwal, W/o. Shri Santosh Kumar Agarwal, aged about 25 years, R/o. G. S. House, Korba, District Bilaspur (Now District Korba) Madhya Pradesh (Now Chhattisgarh) 4. Smt. Indra Mani Devi Agarwal, W/o.Shri G.S. Agarwal, aged about 55 years, R/o. G. S. House, Korba, District Bilaspur (Now District Korba) Madhya Pradesh (Now Chhattisgarh) ^ APPLICATION FOR RESTORATION OF W. P. N0. 20/1996 HIGI-iCOURT QF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR 1\ APPL.ECAEMTS NON-APPLJGANTS M.C.C, No. 156 of 2011 iWs. Korba Chemicals, Korba and Another VERSUS State of Madhya Pradesh & Others APPLSCATJON FDR RESTORATION OFW.P. N0.20/1996. SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. AanEhotrE. J. Present: Snri Rahul Jha, Advocate for the appiicants. Shri N.N. Roy< Panel Lawyerfor the State. ORDERCORAy 4. 6. (P^.,^: ^\ 2T" day.of April, 2011) Heard. i.A. No.1, appiicatlon for condonation of deiay. There is delay of 51 days in flling the restoration appijcation, to which iearned counsei appearing for other slde has no objectjon, Sufficient and coaent reasons have been shown for condonation of deiay. Accordingiy, I.A. No.1, applicatlon for condonation of deiay In fiiing miscelianeous appiication, is ajiowed. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the counsel for the petltioners could not appear on account of bona fide mistake, therefore, Writ Petltion No. 20/1996, which was'dismissed on 03/12/2010, may be restored to Its fiie. Reasonable and sufficient cause has been shown. Writ Petitlon No. 20/1996, is restored'to the original file< subject to deposit of a sum of Rs.1,500/- to the High Court Legai Aid CommitSee. A copy of this order be pla-ced on record of the origlnal writ petition and the same be Sisted for hearing. [§ d/. Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Arun