IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3156 OF 2008 APPLICATION NO.3156 OF 2008 APPLICATION NO.3156 OF 2008 IN IN IN FIRST FIRST FIRST APPEAL NO.816 OF 2002 APPEAL NO.816 OF 2002 APPEAL NO.816 OF 2002 Ravansiddha Bhanudas Pawar ... Applicant Vs. The Municipal Corporation of ... Respondents Greater Bombay & Ors. Mrs. Shekhar i/by J. Shekhar & Co. for the Applicant. Ms. Usha Ralvi i/by Mayur Narendra for respondent No.2. CORAM CORAM CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA, J : ANOOP V. MOHTA, J : ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATE DATE DATE : 20TH JUNE, 2008 : 20TH JUNE, 2008 : 20TH JUNE, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. :- :- :- 1. This is an application for condonation of delay in filing the present Civil Application for restoration of the matter, as pursuant to the order dated 24th January, 2007, the appellant failed to file compilation of documents as directed. 2. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2 has opposed the same, whereas there is no reply to the opposition- respondent No. 1. 3. Considering the averments made in Para 3 2 of the application, I am of the opinion that party should not suffer because of fault on the part of Advocate. There is clear averment made that the applicant never received such communication and therefore could not contact the Advocate for so-called compliance of order. The Advocate is also helpless as the documents and pleadings and Notes of evidence could not have been filed without proper instructions from the applicant who is aged about 86 years. Therefore, taking into account this fact, I am incline to grant this application in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b). 4. Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) and (b) only. Liberty is granted to the applicant to apply for other prayers. ( ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)