HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH. BILASPUR MCC No.172/2010 PETmONER South Eastem Coaffields Limtted, Seepat Road, ffilaspur, Chhattisgarh Versus RESPONDENTS 1 - Munieipal Corporation, Bilaspin-, Chhattisgarh 2 Commissioner, Municipal Corpo., Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh APPLICATIGN FORRESTORATION Appearance: Mr. Praveen Das, Counsel for the petitioner. Mrs. Hameeda Siddique, Counsel for the respondents. ORALQRDER —~ (30.03.2010) SUNILKUMARSINHA.J. Heard on I.A.No.01/2010, whteh is an appUcation for condonation of delay In filing MCC No.172/2010. According to the office report, the MCC is barred by 11 days of limitation. On due consideration of the submisstons made by learned counsel for the parties, I am satisfied that the petitioner has shown sufficient cause for the delay in filing the restoration application. Accordingly, I.A. No.01/2010 is allowed and the delay of 11 days in filing the restoration appiication i.e. MCC No.172/2010 is hereby condoned. Leamed counsel for the parties are also heard on the restoration application i.e. MCCNo;172/^)10. The petitioner is seeking restoration of W.P. No.884/2001, which was dismissed for want of proswutiw v'tde orderdated 05.02.2010. ? u MCCNo.172/2010 l/V-Vjt^ On due consideration of the siAmisstor®made by learned counsel for the parties and the grounds taken in the restoration application, 1 am satlsfied that the absence of the petitioner's counsel on 05.02.2010, when W.P.No.88'^001 was taken up for hearing, was based on bonaflde grounds. Accordingly, MCC No.172^010 is attowed and W.P. No.884/2001 is restored to its original nymber.__ A-_— Sdl- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge r <...