1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD 28. APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 9/2008 (NARAYAN NIVRUTTI KADAM V/S MANDABAI NARAYAN KADAM) -------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Court’s or Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Judge’s or directions and Registrar’s orders Orders Mr.G.K.Thigale, Adv., for the appellant. Mr.M.M.Patil (Beedkar), Adv., for sole respondent. ... CORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE:11-2-2010 P.C.:- 1. Heard Mr. Thigale, Counsel for the husband Narayan and Mr. M.M.Patil ( Beedkar), Counsel for the wife Mandabai. 2. Dismissal of M.C.A.No. 104/2004, vide order dt.4.8.2006, moved for setting aside the order of dismissal, whereby restoration was sought, is the root cause for assailing the order. Though laxity was demonstrated by the husband before the learned appellate Court, however, the fact remains that both the parties 2 necessarily to be heard on merits as to respective claims and contentions. It was the absence of the Advocate which has cost heavily to the appellant husband. It follows that, for such omission, the appellant, as a party, should not face the brunt. Mr. Thigale,Counsel,submits that there is already a partition, the wife enjoys the property, she is blessed with kids, she is being maintained by major children. 3. Considering the status of both the parties, while dealing with the order under challenge, it needs to be considered that the wife is also dragged for sufficient long duration which needs compensation to be paid to her. Hence order: The order dt.4.8.2006 of the learned first appellate Court rejecting the restoration petition is set aside. Miscellaneous Civil Application No.104/2006 moved before the learned Judge is 3 granted. R.C.A. No.188/2003, on the file of learned Ad hoc Additional District Judge, Beed, is restored to original position. The appellant to pay Rs. 10,000/- to his wife Mandabai directly within four weeks and tender receipt before the learned Ad hoc Additional District Judge, Beed. Parties to appear before the learned Judge on 8th March, 2010. This Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the matter. Appeal from order (No.9/2008) is allowed to the extent indicated above. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE agp/9-08ao