1 pps IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.605 OF 2010. IN WRIT PETITION NO.2720 OF 1992 Vijay Nilkanth Gokhale ...Petitioner Versus Bombay Port Trust & Another ...Respondents Mr. M.S.Topkar i/b. Anil Kumar Joshi in support of Notice of Motion for Petitioners. Mr. Sandip Pathak i/b. Little & Co. for the Respondent No.1 Mr.H.V.Mehta for the Respondent No.2 CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR & R.Y.GANOO, JJ. DATED:- 10th AUGUST, 2011. P.C. 1. Heard Counsel for the Parties. This motion is to recall the Order dated 13.10.2010 and to restore the writ petition to the file to its original number. 2. The explanation offered is that, on the given date the Advocate for the petitioner was unwell and the matter went by default on that account. The respondent no.1 is opposing this application. In the 2 reply affidavit, the fact that the petitioner’s Advocate was unwell on the given date has not been disputed. The reply affidavit, however, suggests that nothing prevented the petitioner to make suitable arrangement or to appear himself before the Court. We are of the considered opinion that the explanation offered by the petitioner, on affidavit is just and proper and sufficient cause for excusing the absence of the petitioner . 3. In the interest of justice, therefore, the Order dated 13th October, 2010 is recalled and the writ petition is restored to the filed to its original number, inspite of the vehement opposition of the Counsel for the respondent no.1. 4. The restored writ petition shall now proceed as per its turn under appropriate caption. 5. The petition is restored on condition that the petitioner shall not be heard to pray for keeping back the matter of adjournment on any count, in future, in the restored matter. (R.Y.GANOO, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)