\^' HtGH COURT OF GHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVIStON BENCH Coram : HON'BLESHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J. APPLICANT: NQN-AJPPUOANT Misc.Civi! Case No. 703 of 2006 M/s Prem Prakash through its Partner Prem Prakash Wassan, S/o Late Jagdisti Lal Wasain, aged about 66 years, Resident of Wassan Chaal, Korba, Tah. & Dist. Korba (Chhattisgarh) Versus < General Managpr,; Ws Bhargrt Aluminium Co. Ltd., Balconagar KORBA (Chhattisgarh) APPLICATIONFOR RESTORATIONOF CIVIL REVISION N0.432/2002 Present: Shri Amrito Das, eounsel for the petitioner. None for the respondents. ; ORDER (24th0ctot r, 200^ The foltowng order of the Court was psssed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J.: By allowing IA No.3533/2006, the document filed alor^ withthls application istaken on record. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner is heardon M.(C).P. No.1893/2006, a petition for condonatton of delay in ffling the restoration petition. 3» On due consideration of the submissions of teamed coimsel for the petitioner, we aresatisfied that Ihe petitioner has succeeded (n showing sufflcient cause forthe delay in ffling the restoration petition. 4. M.(C). P. No.1893/2006, therefore, is allowed and the detay in flling the restoratfon petiflon is hereby condoned. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner Is heard on the restoration petition. 6. The petitioner is seeking restoration of Civil Revision No.432/2002, whlch was dismissed as withdrawn vide wder dated 21.10.2005. 7. Shri Amrito Das, tearned counsel Tor the petittoner submitted that the petitioner sought permission to w'rthdraw his Revision Petition in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Konkan Railway Corporatte»n Limtted Vs Rahi Constructton (P) Ltd. (20Q2) 2SCC 388, and thereafter, ffled a writ peUtion E^ainst the order which was impugned in Civil Revlsion No.432^2002. Learnedcounsel further submitted that after flling ofthewrit petttton, the Apex Court overruled the decision in the case of Konkan Railway Corporation Umited (supra) in asubsequent declsion in the case of SBP & Co Vs Patel Engineering Ltd aid anether, reported in(2005)8 SCC 618 and as such.the petitloner again sought permission to withdraw the writ petition wnth Itberty of seeking revival of the Civil Reviston No.432/2002. 8; On due consideration of the subml^ions of learned counsel for the petitioner and the circumstances in which the petitioner flrst withdrew the Civil Revision and then the writ petitlon, MCC No.703/2006 is aUowed and Givil Revia'on No.432/2002 Is restored to its original number. A Sd/- Chief Justice padma Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge