IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.1193 of 2010 GULAB CHAND SINGH & ORS Versus SHANTI DEVI & ORS ----------- For the petitioners : Mr. Maheshwar Prasad, Advocate For O.P.No.1 : Prem Kumar Verma, Advocate ---- 3 25.08.2010 A limitation petition has been filed for condoning the delay of about 13 days in preferring the M.J.C. No. 1193 of 2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the opposite party no. 1 and from the averments made in paragraph nos. 3, 4 and 5 it appears that the petitioners were prevented by sufficient cause from preferring this M.J.C. application within time. In above view of the matter the limitation petition is allowed and the delay in filing of M.J.C. No. 1193 of 2010 is hereby condoned. Now I proceed to consider the M.J.C. No. 1193 of 2010 on its own merit. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for opposite party no. 1. This application has been filed for 2 restoration of C.R. No. 956/2009 which stood dismissed for want of prosecution on 8.2.2010. On being satisfied with the sufficiency of reasons mentioned in this application for omission on part of the petitioners, the same is allowed and the Civil Revision No. 956/2009 is restored to its original file and number. Spd/- (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)