SSK/906 1 cas.241.09 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 241 OF 2009 IN CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 736 OF 2006 IN SECOND APPEAL NO. 499 OF 2006 Shri Narendra Laxman Kayastha & Ors. ....Applicants (Org. Def. Nos. 5 to 8) Versus Shri Murlidhar Govind Kayastha & Ors. ...Respondents Shri S. M. Sabrad, Advocate for the applicants. Shri P. N. Joshi, Advocate for the respondent no.1. CORAM : RANJIT MORE, J. DATED :30TH JUNE, 2011. P.C.: The above civil application is filed for restoration of Civil Application No.739 of 2006. This Court by an Order dated 31st January, 2008 passed in Civil Application No.739 of 2006 directed the applicants to take steps to serve respondent nos. 2, 3, 6 & 7 within six weeks and in the event, the applicants failed to take steps in that regard, the application would stand dismissed for non-prosecution. It appears that respondent no. 7 was served. However, rest of the respondents could not be served, and therefore, the civil application was dismissed for non-prosecution. In paragraph 4 of the civil application, the applicants have made an averment SSK/906 2 cas.241.09 that their advocate had sent notices to respondent nos. 2, 3, 6 & 7 by R.P.A.D on 23rd February, 2008. However, so far the acknowledgments have not been received. The applicants have, however, made a statement that they had filed an affidavit on 13th March, 2008 pointing out therein that they had taken steps to serve the said respondents. In my opinion, the reasons given in the application for restoration of the Civil Application No. 739 of 2006 are sufficient. The civil application is accordingly allowed in terms of prayer clause (b). 2. The applicants are directed to serve respondent nos. 2, 3 & 6 within a period of six weeks from today and thereafter file affidavit of service. (RANJIT MORE, J.)