1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.74 OF 2008 IN TESTAMENTARY SUIT NO.44 OF 2002 Ramesh Narayanrao Siddhanti ..Plaintiff V/s Smt.Pratibha Narayan Kabbur & ors ..Defendants And Vinayak Narayanrao Siddhanti & ors ..Respondents Mr.Yatin Shah, Advocate, for the plaintiff Mr.Sunil Purohit i/b.Mr.Y.N.Adhia, Advocate, for the defendant Nos.1 to 4 CORAM : R.M.SAVANT, J. DATE : 21ST NOVEMBER, 2008 P.C. . By the above Notice of Motion, the applicant/the original plaintiff seeks restoration of the above suit which has been dismissed on 6th June, 2008, on account of the non-appearance of the advocate of the plaintiff on the said date. The reasons for the non-appearance 2 are mentioned in the affidavit in support of the Motion. The two reasons are the illness of the plaintiff and that the advocate of the plaintiff Mrs.Mudbidri was out of town during the contemporaneous time. 2. The learned counsel for the defendant Nos.1 to 4 Mr.Sunil Purohit draws the Court's attention to certain inconsistencies in the said affidavit in support. Be that as it may, the plaintiff cannot be made to suffer for the non-appearance of his advocate on the said date. The Notice of Motion is, therefore, required to be allowed and is accordingly made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). The plaintiff to pay costs of Rs.1000/- to the Maharashtra Legal Services Authority within a period of four weeks from date. (R.M.SAVANT, J.)