IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.2069 of 2010 ACHHELAL RAI @ AKSHAY LAL RAI & ANR. Versus RAJDEO RAI & ORS. ----------- 5 01.09.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. No one appears on behalf of opposite party no. 1. I.A. No. 6608/2010 has been filed for condoning the delay of about 30 days in preferring the M.J.C. No. 2069 of 2010. From the averments made in paragraph no. 4 of this interlocutory application, it appears that the petitioners were prevented by sufficient cause from preferring this M.J.C. application within time. In above view of the matter the aforesaid interlocutory application is allowed and the delay in filing of M.J.C. No. 2069 of 2010 is hereby condoned. Now I proceed to consider M.J.C. No. 2069 of 2010 on its own merit. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for opposite party no. 1. 2 This application has been filed for restoration of C.R. No. 1017/2007, which stood dismissed for want of prosecution on 4.2.2010. On being satisfied with the sufficiency of reasons mentioned in this application for omission on part of the petitioners, the same is allowed and the Civil Revision No. 1017/2007 is restored to its original file and number. Spd/- (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)