1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. OF 2009 (CIVIL APPLICATION STAMP NO.7166 OF 2009) IN CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.140 OF 2005 Asma Hussain w/o Iqbal Hussain & others APPLICANTS VERSUS Purna Education Committee & anr. RESPONDENTS ..... Shri S.S. Choudhari, Advocate for the applicants Shri L.H. Kawale, Advocate holding for Shri K.J. Suryawanshi, Advocate for respondent No.1. Shri P.C. Mayure, Advocate holding for Shri S.G. Chapalgaonkar, Advocate for respondent No.2. ..... CORAM : S.P. DAVARE, J. DATED : 23rd June, 2009. ORAL ORDER : 1. Perused. 2. The applicants have preferred the present Civil Application for setting aside the order passed by this Court on 16.4.2007, dismissing the Civil 2 Revision Application No.140/2005, and same be restored to file at its original stage. The applicants (original Plaintiffs) had filed Special Civil Suit No. 112/1993 in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Parbhani for the recovery of amount of Rs.21,000/- from respondent No.1 towards the rent in respect of land bearing Survey No.11/2 in Ward No.4, Purna for the period of 15.2.1991 to 14.7.1993 with interest etc. However, the said civil suit was dismissed by judgment dated 20.7.2000. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order, the applicants preferred Regular Civil Appeal No.19/2003 before District Judge, Parbhani. However, it was also dismissed by Adhoc District Judge, Parbhani by judgment and decree dated 21.4.2005. The applicants preferred Civil Revision Application No.140/2005 before this Court assailing the judgment and decree passed by Adhoc District Judge, Parbhani on 21.4.2005. 3. After hearing the said Civil Revision Application on 19.8.2005, this Court issued notice to the respondents. Thereafter on 16.2.2006, this Court granted Rule in the said Civil Revision Application and directed that non applicant No.1 to deposit the amount of Rs.21,000/- within four weeks. Accordingly, the said amount was deposited in this Court. Thereafter, the said Civil Revision Application was on board on 20.3.2007 for final hearing, but did not reach on the said date. Thereafter, it did not appear on the board. On 16.4.2007, on the board of Association, it was mentioned that the final hearing board dated 9.4.2007 would be taken, but the said note did not come up to the notice of Advocate for the applicants. Hence, the said Civil Revision Application 3 was called out on 16.4.2007 and was dismissed on the same day. However, it was not followed by the Advocate till 13.3.2009. On 13.3.2009 when the enquiry was made by the husband of applicant No.2 and son-in-law of applicant No.1 about the said Civil Revision Application, the said fact of dismissal of the Civil Revision Application was revealed and it was noticed on the computer that it was dismissed in default on 16.4.2007. 4. Accordingly, it is the contention of the applicants that the Advocate could not remain present before this Court when the matter was called out on 16.4.2007, since it was not noticed by him till 13.3.2009. Thus, the said Civil Revision Application came to be dismissed due to inadvertence. Hence the applicants have preferred the present civil application for restoration of the said Civil Revision Application, requesting to set aside the order dated 16.4.2007, dismissing the Civil Revision Application. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Considering the rival submissions and also considering the contentions of the present civil application, it is apparent that Civil Revision Application No.140/2005 came to be dismissed in default on 16.4.2007 due to oversight and inadvertence of the applicants. The applicants have shown sufficient grounds for their non appearance on 16.4.2007 before the Court and the said ground appears to be bonafide. Besides, that, opportunity is required to be given to the applicants to prosecute the Civil Revision Application No.140/2005 on merits to do substantial justice to the 4 parties. Hence, in view of the aforesaid position, present Civil Application is required to be allowed by setting aside the dismissal order of Civil Revision Application No.140/2005, dated 16.4.2007 with directions to restore the said Civil Revision Application to file at its original stage. 6. In the result, the present Civil Application succeeds and the same is allowed in terms of prayer clause (B) thereof and the order of dismissal of Civil Revision Application No.140/2005, dated 16.4.2007 stands set aside. Civil Revision Application No.140/2005 stands restored to file at its original position. The Civil Revision Application No.140/2005 be fixed for final hearing on 27.7.2009 at 2.30 p.m. (S.P. DAVARE, J.) fmp/ca7166.09