1 Bsb IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 443 OF 2009 ALONG WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 534 OF 2009 Suraj Salian ... Appellant v/s The Bombay Municipal Corpn. Of Gr. Bombay ... Respondent Mr.D.R.Shah for the appellant. Mrs.K.K.Soraan for the respondent. CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: 8TH MARCH, 2010 P.C.: 1. The appeal has been preferred against the order passed by the Trial Court dismissing Notice of Motion No. 276 of 2009. This motion was filed for restoration of the L.C. Suit No.142 of 2007 which was dismissed for default on 30.3.2009. The learned Judge, while refusing to grant the prayers in the motion, has observed that despite cautioning the appellant to adduce evidence on the adjourned date of 2 hearing the appellant had chosen to remain absent. Apart from this, his advocate was not present on the date when the matter was dismissed. 2. Considering the circumstances and the contentions raised in the affidavit in support of the motion, in my view, the suit being L.C. Suit No.142 of 2007 should be restored to file, however, on payment of costs. 3. Accordingly, the aforesaid suit is restored on payment of costs of Rs.3000/- to the Corporation. Costs condition precedent. Costs to be paid within two weeks from today. 4. Appeal from order disposed of accordingly along with the civil application. 5. It is agreed by both parties that the suit structure is well in existence. ..... 3