( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8853 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 316 OF 2009 Kundlik s/o Saluji Kakade and others APPLICANTS VERSUS Tulshiram s/o Hanmanta Bodkhe & others RESPONDENTS .... Mr. S.S. Nirkhee, advocate for the applicants. Mr. S.D. Hivarekar, advocate for the respondents. .... [CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] [DATE : 2nd March, 2010] PER COURT : 1. Heard counsel. 2. There is delay of 23 days in filing the application for restoration. The counsel for the applicants submits that he had not received the daily board on the given date and, therefore, could not note that the petition was enlisted for hearing. He learnt about dismissal of the petition, in default, after considerable delay. He submits that the delay is unintentional. I deem it proper to accept the ( 2 ) explanation. The delay stands condoned and the petition is restored to its original position. The civil application is accordingly allowed. [ V.R. KINGAONKAR ] JUDGE NPJ/ca8853.09