1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR. CAO 443 OF 2009 IN mca st no.5702/2009 (Resto) in M.C.A. 58/99 (Review) in Rej MCA No.866/07 in SA No.323/98 (DECIDED) Mohd.Siddique Shaikh Munir Musalman .. ..vs..Abdul Rashid Munir Musalman and ors. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or Court's or Judge's directions and Registrar's order. orders. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram : C.L.PANGARKAR, J. Dated : 14th August 2009. Heard Ms.P.D.Rane, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr.K.V.Thomas, learned counsel for the respondents. This application has been filed for condonation of delay in filing the application for restoration of the M.C.A. The application discloses that the matter was listed before the Registrar on 25/10/2007 and two weeks’ time was sought by the lawyer for the applicant/appellant for removal of the office objection. Two weeks’ time was granted by the Registrar and the matter was thereafter dismissed on 19/11/2007. This clearly goes to show that the applicant/appellant was aware of the fact that the office objection is required to be removed 2 within two weeks. The statement of the appellant that the clerk inadvertently failed to remove the office objection cannot be accepted. The time was only of two weeks and it is difficult to accept that the clerk did not know or he failed to remove the office objection inadvertently. Even if he had inadvertently failed, there is no explanation of delay of 624 days in filing this application for condonation of delay. In view of this, the application stands rejected. JUDGE. chute