1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR. M.C.A.NO.150/2009 IN C.A.NO.621/2008, 622/2008, M.C.A. 347/2008, M.C.A.NO.252/2006 IN MCA ST.NO.14648 OF 2008 IN S.A.NO.333 of 2001 Trembakrao Wasudeorao Ardak through L.Rs. ..vs.. Smt.Leelabai Yashwantrao Ardak and others. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or Court's or Judge's directions and Registrar's order. orders. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram : C.L.PANGARKAR, J. Dated : 4th August 2009. 1. Heard Mr.V.A.Kothale, learned counsel for the appellants. 2. All these applications are being disposed by this common order. 3. The present heirs of the original appellant have filed all these applications. The original appellant had preferred an appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the court below. The appeal came to be registered as Appeal No.333 of 2001. The said appeal came to be dismissed on 17/9/2004 and an application for 2 restoration of the said appeal was filed on 3/11/2004 along with an affidavit. That application for restoration of the appeal also came to be dismissed. Therefore, another application for restoration of M.C.A.NO.616 of 2004 was filed being application No.252 of 2006 which came to be dismissed for non-compliance of the order of the court. Hence, another application No.347 of 2008 was filed for restoration of M.C.A.no.252 of 2006. When this application was filed, the present appellant died and his heirs preferred this application. In this application, an application for setting aside the abatement was filed. Thereafter application No.622 of 2008 was filed under Order 22 rule 2 of C.P.C. Application No.621 of 2008 for condonation of delay came to be dismissed. Hence, another application No.150 of 2009 came to be filed for restoration. 4. All these applications have been heard. All these applications, for the reasons stated therein, are allowed. Accordingly, the appeal memo be amended. The appellants to pay costs of Rs. 1500/- (Rupees one thousand five hundred only) to the respondents within period of fifteen days. After the costs are paid and appeal is restored, list the appeal in the first week of September for final hearing, preferably on Monday. Costs be deposited in the court. JUDGE. chute