1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.934 OF 2009 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.350 OF 2006 (Krishna Patil (deceased thru’ LRs vs. Harishchandra Patil) Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Mr. Vyas & Bhalwalkar Advocate for Applicants. Mr.K.N. Kore, Advocate for respondents. Coram : Smt. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA, J. Date : 1st July,2009 PC :- This Civil Application is taken out for restoration of Civil Application No.1406 of 2004, which was dismissed for default on 17th December 2008. The application has been preferred on 23rd January 2009. The applicant also prays for condonation of delay in filing the Civil Application. At paragraph no.2 of the civil application, it is contended that the learned Advocate appearing for the applicant could not attend the matter on the relevant date, as the Clerk of the Advocate failed to inform that the Civil Application was on board for 2 hearing. Thereafter as soon as applicant’s Advocate learnt about the order of dismissal of the Civil Application, the present application for restoration came to be filed. 2. Respondents oppose the application alleging that the delay in filing the present application has occurred only because the applicant was trying to avoid a particular coram as it was not convenient to him. I see no material in support of any such allegation. Considering the ground made out for consideration, I am inclined to allow the Civil Application. The Civil Application is allowed in terms of prayers clause (a) and (b). (Judge)