fc^\ st'vas-^J] HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J, rt)(-^- my [n M.C.C.(PR)No.1115 of 2011 Applicants Appellants Non-applicants Respondents T. George, s/o late Shri V. George, ag.ed 48 years. Smt. Selinj George, VWo Shri T. George aged 44 years, Gini George, D/o. Shri T. George, aged about 21 years. Jeslie George, D/o Shri T. George, aged about 18years. All appellants are residing at Kalikanagar, Tifra, Bilaspur, distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) VERSUS Baldeo Singh, S/o Gurbachan Singh, aged about 46 years, Owner and Driver of Truck No. C.G.07-ZD-0838, R/o. Camp - 1, Teen Darshan, Mandir Bhilai, P.S. Chhawni, Distt. Durg (C.G.) The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Through : Divisional Manager, Opposite the Old High Court, Bilaspur (C.G.) M.C.C. (PR) No. 2320 of 2011 Applicants Appellants 1 T. George, aged 48 years, s/o late V. George. 2 Smt. Selin George, aged 44 years, W/o T. George, .C.C. (PR) Nos. 1115 and 2320 of 2011 Non-applicants Respondents Gini George, aged about 21 years, D/o.T. George. Jesile George, aged about 18 years, D/o T. George, All resident of.Kalika Nagar, Tifra, Bilaspur District, Bilaspur (C.G.) VERSUS Baldeo Singh, aged about 46 years, S/o Gurbachan Singh Panjabi, Owner and Driver of Truck No. C.G.07-ZD-0838, R/o. Camp - 1, Teen Darshah, Mandir Bhilai, P.S. Chhawni, Distt. Durg (C.G.) The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Through : Divisional Manager, Opposite High Court, Bilaspur (C.G.) Applications for restoration ofM.A. No. 131/2005 Present: Shri Vijay Kumar Deshmukh, counsel for the petitioners. ORDER •th (15"November,2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Shri Vijay Kumar Deshmukh, learned " counsel for the petitioners is heard on the applications for condonation of the delay ih filing the restoration petitions. 2) On due cbnsideration of the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners and the grounds taken in the restoration petitions, we are satisfied thatthe petitioners have succeeded in ^s'fs^'^:-^'':. ..&. '"•^' .C.C. (PR) Nos. 1115 and 2320 of 2011 showing sufficient cause for the delay in filing the restoration petitions. 3) The applications for condonation of delay, therefore, are allowed and the delay in filing the restoration petitions is hereby condoned. 4) Shri Vijay Kumar Deshmukh, learned counsel for the petitioners is heard on the restoration petitions. 5) The petitioners are seeking restoration of M.A. No.131 of 2005, which was dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 01.12.2010. 6) On due consideration of the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners and the grounds taken in the restoration petitions, we are satisfied that the absence of the petitioners'/appellants' counsel on 01.12.2010, when M.A.No.131 of 2005 was taken-up for hearing, was based on bona fide grounds. 7) M.C.C.(PR) Nos. 1115 of2011 and 2320 of 2011, therefore, are allowed and.M.A. No.131 of 2005 iss restored to its original number. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge subbu ^•"—-— •