1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 949 OF 2009 Sou Sunanda Rajaram Gachake .. Petitioner Vs Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, Pune - Division .. Respondent Mr. S.K.Chinchalikar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. G.A.Karmalkar i/b G.S.Hegde, for the Respondent. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATE : 25/08/2009 PC: 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Rule. By consent, rule made returnable forthwith. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent waives service. By consent, the petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal at the admission stage itself. 2. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 26.6.2007 passed by the Adhoc District Judge-3, Baramati rejecting Civil Misc. Application No.2 of 2007. The Civil Misc. Application was filed by the petitioner under Order IX rule 9 of CPC seeking restoration of the Motor Accident Claim Petition No.413/B/2001, which was dismissed for non prosecution vide T 2 order dated 29.11.2006. I have perused the order impugned in the writ petition. In my opinion, even if it is assumed that the reasons given in the application for restoration were not entirely correct and the reasons recorded by the learned Judge rejecting the application cannot be faulted, considering overall facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, I am inclined to grant one more opportunity to the petitioner- claimant. Hence, the following order. (a) The judgment and order dated 26.6.2007, impugned in the present writ petition is set aside. Civil Misc. Application No.2 of 2007 filed by the petitioner is allowed. M.A.C.P. No 413/B/2001 is restored to file. The Court below shall decide the claim petition on merits in accordance with law expeditiously. Parties are directed to cooperate for expeditious disposal of the claim petition. Rule is accordingly made absolute. No costs. (D. B. Bhosale, J.) 3