IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.2219 of 2008 GHAN SHYAM PRASAD & ORS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- For the petitioners: Mr. Nityanand Tiwary, Advocate For the State : Mr. A.K. Jha, GA 2 7 13/10/2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. The restoration petition has been filed after a delay of about nine years since the limitation petition in LPA. No.1376 of 1999 was dismissed on 30.11.1999 which led to dismissal of that LPA as barred by limitation on 17.12.1999. Some vague allegations have been made against the then conducting counsel without naming him. But on going through the materials on record, we find that there is no good cause made out to either explain the long delay in filing this restoration application or to explain why the counsel then appearing for the petitioner in LPA. No.1376 of 1999 did not appear to press the application for condonation of delay. In fact, the original records of LPA. No.1376 of 1999 except the ordersheet were destroyed on account 2 of lapse of long years and thereafter the records have been reconstructed. We find that the dispute was over allotment of ‘chak’ and not of any serious nature involving title to anyone in course of consolidation proceeding. In the facts of the case, we are not persuaded to allow the limitation petition or the restoration petition and, therefore, the same are hereby dismissed. Neyaz/ (Shiva Kirti Singh. ACJ.) (S. K. Sharma, J.)