IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.3629 of 2008 ARBIND KUMAR & ANR Versus DIV.MANAGER,ORIENTAL INS.CO.&O ----------- 3. 07.10.2009 Learned counsel for the petitioner and O.P. both are present. Learned counsel for O.P. does not make any objection to the prayer of the petition. This is an application for restoration of M.A. No. 299 of 2006 which stood dismissed on 27.11.2008 on account of non-prosecution as the counsel for the appellant had not appeared on repeated calls. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and on consideration of the grounds as set forth in the petition as well as the supplementary affidavit filed today, I feel that reasonable explanation has been offered for non-appearance of the learned counsel when the case had been called for. In the circumstances, restoration is allowed and the said M.A. No. 299 of 2006 is ordered to be restored to its original file. (C.M. Prasad, J.) Ravi/-