^/- s •f—^ INTHEHKmCOURTG)FGHH^BSQAI®^BILASP® mss M,@;C^6..^^/3.....,.;.,/2005 :/: APPELEANT^feTFTf^?.; NON-APPLICANTNO:2 VERSUS y Kartik S/q Jagdeo Sonkar AgeB^ab6ut^-/:60,^.years R/o Achholi, '['iih. & ^PoBce Sta.tion"' „ Da.yhdilohara,. DurgfC.G.) :^1 RESPONElENTS CLAIMANTS /•^^•y ii;l ^".JI^J^i ^y ^'.. BtShesarAgeda.bout;42years t ^ <s^^ NONAPPKICANTNO.l. . SQnlofShriiSainSai,,| ^ p • Smt. Kumari /Bai,-aged aboyf 38 years wife ofBishesar, Both'are resi&ent ofVillage Achholi,Tah aridP.S; /Daundilohara, Distt:I3urg(e.G:) Narottam THakur Agedjaiaouf 35 yeai-s, Son of^Shri KynwarBingh Tha}£ur,fiesidentQfViIlage Achholfe-Tali and P.S. • ;aundilohara,Distt-Dy.rg(e.G.) NON-APPLIGANTN0.3 • 4^'The Nattohal Iiisurance'eo.{ : •; . ^';:...':':..:''..;.;:;../-!:.L:;:^ Hmited^througK;'Its @iyisk>nal Manger,Divisicm OHice, Supe^ bhilai, 'Ghari GUpwk, Distt- Durg ••';(C.G.)^....,;1':.:..•;:: .':1'.^::1:;:'..:'.'-1:;'^ APPyC^TIQN:^G)R^EES^aRATI!3: '<3®!:®Ei5;MIgeEI^^ APPEAEN(3.U58y2Q04^I?TEK3R@(^I^N(3''I'^ 19/01/20Q5.1^ XI-HC-78 a'n^Tqirf^iR; crarsn^rsbtii* ^ 'fl? i / °^ Hl*f^ll SbHT^i 'sss •<iww^, WTS\U'IG, RidiyLi<, _^_ MC<-- fo^-fo^ •^^R' 200 OT^TCR^ (l?^^) ^\ ?Tarw(Tf?(T3n^r 11-8-20SS Shri Vivek Shsrma, coun Shri Anand Kumar GUota, counsel for the National Insurance Company. Leamed counsel for that the defaults be made good| stand dismissed automatically ^ Since the applicant has| Learned counsel for th ^prfyPftT TORTf if fei^ rfSTRIT ^srf^irst^T se! for the sppiicant. Heard. The instant MCC has Ijieen filed by the applicant for restoration of Misc. ADpeal No.1158/2004, 'he applicant submits that Misc. Appeal No.1158/2004 was taken up f^r hearing on 19-1-2005 and it was directed within 15 days,.failing which the appeal shall ithout reference to the Bench. not complied with the order passed by this Court in Misc. Appeal No.1158/^004, the appeal has been dismissed. applicant submits that due to bona fide mistake the process fee could (lot be paid in time and he prays for restoring the Misc. Appeai to its origin^l number. The application for restoration of Misc. Appeal is supported by ar| affidavft of counsel. Having considered the f^cts and circumstances of the case, material on record and in view of the debision of Supreme Court rendered in the case of Rafiq and another vs. M^nshilal and another (AtR 1981 SC 1400) wherein it has been held that tflie party should not suffer because of mistake or error ofthe counsel, the MCp is allowed. The Misc. Appeal is restored to its original number i.e. MISC. APPEAL N0.1158/2004. Copy of this order be pla. CertifieS copyas per rulejs. ;ed in Misc. AppealNo.1158/2004. Sd/- Fakhruddin Judge P.T.O.