[1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO. 4623 OF 2004 WRIT PETITION NO. 4623 OF 2004 WRIT PETITION NO. 4623 OF 2004 Indian Bank .. Petitioner. V/s. The Pune Municipal Corporation of the City of Pune and Ors. .. Respondents. Mr. P.M. Pethe and Ms. Pitambare & Co. for the petitioner. Mr. Rajesh Ketkar for respodnent No.1. CORAM : ANOOP V.MOHTA, J. CORAM : ANOOP V.MOHTA, J. CORAM : ANOOP V.MOHTA, J. DATE : 25TH NOVEMBER, 2004. DATE : 25TH NOVEMBER, 2004. DATE : 25TH NOVEMBER, 2004. P.C. . Heard. The petitioner bank has invoked the provisions of Article 227 of the Constitution of India and challenged the impugned order dated 29th April, 2003, passed by the Additional District Judge, Pune, whereby, it’s application for restoration of the appeal, was dismissed. There is no dispute to the fact, that the application for condonation of delay in filing the said restoration application, was considered and allowed. I am of the view, that once the condonation of the delay application was considered and it is allowed, there is no reason why this application for restoration of the appeal should not have been considered on merit itself. Therefore, in view of the averments made in the [2] petition, and after consideration of rival contentions between the parties, the present petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b). The impugned order is therefore, set aside and the application for restoration of appeal is allowed. The Civil Appeal No.531/2004 be heard expeditiously. No order is to costs. 2. C.C. expedited. [ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.] [ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.] [ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.]