IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.933 of 2009 MAHENDRA BADAL & ORS Versus THE UNION OF INIDA & ORS ----------- 6 21.6.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the opposite party no.1 and 2. At the pre- notice stage a peremptory order was passed in LPA No.788 of 2007 but that order dated 18.8.2008 was complied only partially and due to inadvertent mistake, requisites for notice upon respondents no.10 to 13 could not be filed. However, requisites were filed for notice upon respondents no.1 to 5 within time and upon others belatedly. Since the default took place before the parties had appeared at pre- notice stage, in the facts of the case, we are of the view that there was substantial compliance of the order dated 18.8.2008. The LPA shall stand restored against respondents no.10 to 13. Let notices be issued to them. This order will be subject to any objection which may be taken by the respondents after they appear in the appeal. This restoration application is allowed. sk (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (V. Nath, J.)