IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.1043 of 2009 SHYAMA PRASAD DAS Versus SUSHANT KUMAR DAS & ORS ----------- 02. 07.10.2009 This is an application for restoration of M.A. No.360 of 2004 which stood dismissed on 20.06.2005 due to non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 10.05.2005 which directed for removal of defects pointed out by the stamp reporter within two weeks with a rider that if the defects were not removed in the period the memo of appeal would stand rejected. This restoration application has been filed on 20.03.2009 and thus it has been filed after three years and ten months of the rejection of the appeal. As is averred in this application learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he had no knowledge about the rejection of the appeal due to non-compliance of the peremptory order. It is further submitted that during the pendency of that appeal the petitioner had filed I.A. No.4860 of 2005 on 22.09.2005 regarding substitution of deceased respondent No.7 in the appeal and that when that application was not listed he verified and learnt that the appeal had been 2 dismissed due to non-compliance of the peremptory order. It is admitted fact that substitution petition was filed on 22.09.2005 i.e., after four months of the rejection of the appeal due to non-compliance of the peremptory order. When such application was filed the appellant was expected to verify about the stage of the case. It cannot be expected that he keep sleeping for nearly four years after filing of the petition. This shows gross laches on the part of the petitioner. Thus, there being inordinate delay in filing of the restoration application, I find no reason to accept the submission, accordingly, and the application is dismissed. Mkr. (C.M. Prasad, J.)