r h\^v \x' HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR MCC N0.02/2010 APPL1CANT RESPONDENT Mohan Lal Jaisinghani Aged about 60 years, S/o Wadhumal Jaisinghani, R/o Gajara Chowk, Charoda (B.M.Y.) District Durg (C.G.) Versus Shri Shailesh Mishra, S/o Ram Shankar Mishra, Prabhandhak Samta Grah Nirman Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Samta Colony, Raipur (C.G.) APPLICATSON FOR RESTORATION Appearance: Mr.Ajay Barik, Counsel for the appljcant. Mr. Raja Sharma, Counsel forthe respondent. ORAL ORDER (08.01.2010) SUNILKUMARSINHA.J. Heard on !.A. No.01/2009, which is an application for condonation of delay in filing the restoration application i.e. MCCNo.2/2010. The application is supported by an affidavit. According to the office report, the restoration application is barred by 2 days of limitation. On due consideration of the submissions made by iearned counsel for the parties, 1 am satisfied that the applicant has shown sufficient cause for the delay in filing the restoration application and the delay of 2 days in filing the restoration application deserves to be condoned. Accordingly, I.A. No.01/2009 is allowed and the delay in filing the restoration appiication is hereby condoned. Learned counsel for the parties are also heard on restoration application i.e. MCC No.2/2010. K MCC N0.02/2010 s shyna u+' The applicant is seeking restoration of Contempt Petition No.54/2006, which was dismissed for want of prosecution on 09.11.2009. On due consideration of the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that after withdrawal of the Vakafatnama by Mr. M.K. Bhaduri, Advocate and his associates on 09.1 1.2009, the non-representation ofthe applicant on the said date appears to be bonafide and the Contempt Petition deserves to be restored. Accordingly, MCC No.2/2010 is allowed and Contempt Petition No.54/2006 is restored to its original number.^ Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge