^ BEFQRE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISG/ AT BILASPUR ®n|toBench APPLICANTS M.C.C. No. 33)\ /2011 1. Mrs. Mutkuni Bai W/o late Chowki Lal Sahu, aged about 65 years. 2. Ramkhilawan S/o Late Chowki Lal Sahu, aged about 49 years. 3. Mrs. Neera Bai D/o Late Chowki Lax Sahu, aged about 45 years. 4. Mrs. Nirmala Bai D/o Late Chowki Lal Sahu, aged about 41 years. .O.flO^0*"^"'1" ^^F »..,^^ ,*»»B»< APfELLANT DEFENDANT RESPONDENTS PLAINTIFFS WW5. Kamal Narayan S/o Late Chowki L&l Sahu, aged about 38 years. 6. Ramesh Kumar S/o Late Chowki Lai Sahu, aged about 35 years, 7. Mrs. Rameshwari D/o Late Chowki Lal Sahu, aged about 30 years. All R/o village Kasdol, Tahsil - Kasdol, District Raipur (C.G.). Chowki Lal Sahu (dead) S/o Pyare Lal Sahu, aged about 35 years, R/o village Kasdol, District Raipur (C.G.). VERSUS Vijay Lal S/o Burga, aged about 55 years, R/o village Kasdol, District Raipur (C.G.). 2. State of M.P. (Now C.G.), through Collector, Raipur (C.G.) / j/ o3 ^ APPLICATIQN UNDER ORDER 22 RULEA & 2)C.P.C. TO SET-ASIDE ABATEMENT 3T^T ^)T f<4i<=h ^T^T 3?I^T 5CTT°F .^ ?%.{^{TqT<?n, •^^<T^ f<ei'ray ^_ i/u^^ 3^j/r[ g^t^------""-----/--"--1 ^\ ^200 ^?? Tf^>'(1^^f) i^?W< ^ffrd 3?1^T Hon'ble Shri Prashant Kumak* Mishra, J. L^l 28.07.2011 Shri Sudhir Verma, coucisel Shri Pradeep Singh, PL In this MCC two applicaf oforiginal appellant Chowki Order 22 Rule 1 ofCPC with a| of second appeal. The other ap|)lication CPC for re-admission of Secotd dismissed for want ofprosecutit At the very outset lear^ied permission ofthe court to with|lraw 22 Rule 1 of CPC with libertjy second appeal to its original nu| may be treated to have been under0rder41 Rule 19 ofCPd. On due consideration, Application under Orderj withdrawn with the liberty afojresaid application for restoration. Heard on application ^ . <. . restoration application. for the applicants. ft)r the State. fil^d ^^-^ -qpqrcff ?? I^.Zt -[f^-^T^: ^ 3^R ^^ |ions have been filed by the legal heirs Sahu. The first application is under [prayer for setting aside the abatement is under Order 41 Rule 19of Appeal No. 1127/1998 which was |>non 12/08/2010. counsel for the applicants seeks the first application under Order to move again aflter restoration of tnber. He would submit that this MCC for restoration ofthe second appeal pr^yer is allowed. 122 Rule 1 ofCPC is pennitted to be and this MCC is treated as an fqr condonation of delay in filing the ,^^:"""^^, y/""' !1 XI-IIC—78 3Tr^T^)Tf^W ^ ^^T 'STI^T 9R1RT°F v" -?;%! ^{iqT<?F4, "^^?<?, f4-rray .[A^1.L-..^.1LD..L ^............................-.....-y.....,.......^^^^ 3Ti^¥I^R'. (1rt^f) ^tTW T^T 3^ afc»le For the reasons assignedj that fhe applicants have been restoration application. Application for condonat|on Heard on restoration. On due consideration assigned for non-appearance of original appellant Chowki L41 to recall the order dated 12/08/2D10 Accordingly, the order Appeal No. 1127/1998 is reca|led restored to its original number. anB oflthe ^T-Gffe'^ 'RTWff ^' i'l^-^ <fa^T^ ^7 3^R -ni^ in application, this court is satisfied to explain the delay in filing the ofdelay is allowed. on being satisfied that fhe reasons applicants who are the legal heirs Sahu, this court considers it proper <|lated 12/08/2010 passed in Second and fhe said Second Appeal is Sd//- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge @