IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.1756 of 2009 HARI SHANKAR SAH Versus SMT.PRAMILA DEVI ----------- 4 26-04-2011 Heard the parties in respect of this restoration application. The explanation for nobody appearing on behalf of the appellant in M.A. no. 37/2002 when it was called out for hearing on 12-11-2008 is failure of the learned counsel for the appellant in marking the cause list. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the appellant is deliberately keeping this appeal pending in order to put pressure upon the respondent who is wife of the appellant and is contesting a decree of divorce passed on certain conditions. It was pointed out that M.A. no. 37/2002 was earlier also dismissed for default on 26-3-2004 and restored in January, 2005. Considering the larger interest of justice, this restoration application is allowed and M.A. no. 37/2002 is restored to its original file on the condition of payment of cost of Rs. 5,000/- to the respondent within two weeks 2 from today. If receipt showing payment of cost of Rs. 5,000/- or refusal by learned counsel for the respondent to accept the cost is not filed within two weeks in that event this order shall stand recalled. BKS/- (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)