1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 529 /2008 IN S.A. NO. 128/2008 (Jagdabai Vijaylaxmi & another vs.Kokku Chandraiah s/o Rangairh) ..................................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ..................................................................................................................................................................... Mr N D Khamborkar,ADv.for applicants CORAM : A.P. BHANGALE, J. DATED : June 18, 2010. 1. Heard. According to learned Advocate for the applicants, the applicant no.2 is a senior citizen who could not come over to Nagpur in order to file the application for amendment and, as such, the application for amendment was dismissed in default for non- appearance, for which the application for restoration was required to be filed before 22nd Oct.2008. The applicant was not well and unable to travel to Nagpur. Therefore,the delay has occurred. It appears that there are two applicants. Recitals in the application are virtually silent as to whom the para nos.1 and 2 of the application is referred to. Recitals are ambiguous, vague, and bereft of details. The application bears the thumb impression; but nobody has testified. One Shri S K Deshpande has signed on behalf of the applicants but he is also absent. Furthermore, the present Advocate appearing before the Court Shri N.D.Khmaborkar has not 2 signed the application. 2. Under these peculiar facts and circumstances and more particularly, in view of such casual, cursory and lackadaisical approach and lethargy and indifference on the part of the applicants, no relief whatsoever can be granted in favour of the applicants. Civil Application is rejected. JUDGE sahare