/0^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM APPLICANTS L RESPONDENTS; HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, GJ & HON'BLE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J. IVI.C.C.No.4eof2008 1. Rajpal Sahu, aged about 70 years, (at present 71 yeare), S/o Shri Bipai Ram Sahu, Kastkar, R/o Vittage Mandhar, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2. Ghanshyam, aged about 6Q years (at present 51 years), S/o Shri Rajpal Sahu, R/o Vitlage Mandhar, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 3. Kesari Bai, aged about 50 years (at present 51 years), D/o Shri Rajj^il $ahu, 4. Kasturt Bai, aged about 52 years (at present 53 yeare), D/o Shri Rajpal Sahu, 5. Urmita Bai, aged about 45 yeara (at present 46 ypars), D/o Shri Rajpal Sahu, 6. Radha bai, aged about 40 years (at present 41 years), D/o Shri Rajpat Sahu, (Presently she died), 7. Murai (Murari), aged atx>ut 36 ye^rs (at present 37 yeare), S/o Shri Rajpal Sahu 8. ©overdhan, aged al^ut 32 yesa's (at present 33 years) S/o Shri Rajpal Sahu, 9. Laxman, aged aboirt 30 y^irs (at present 31 y^ire), S/o Shri Rajpal Sahu, From appiicant no.2 to 9 frirot®hRajpal S/o Bipat Ram Sahu, A11 are resNent of yjilage Mandhar, PH No. 8, Ra, Nj. M. and Tahsil Simga, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS 1. Savitri Bai, D/o Phoolchand Sahu, aged about 40 (At present 41 years), Kastkar, R/o village Mandhar, Distt. Raipur 2. Radheshyam, S/o Phootohand Sahu, aged about 45 yeare (at present ^B -1- 3. 4. yeare), Kastkar, R/o village Mandhar and Na^igaon, Tahsil Bemetara, Distt. Durg (C.G.) Tahsildar Simga, Tahsit Simga, Di^t. Raipur (G.G.) State of Chhattlsgarh, Through Collector, Raipur(C.G.) ApDlJcation for restQration ofwrit Detition in its orialnal nurriber Present: Shri Ravindra Agrawai, learned counsel for the applicants. Shri Praveen Das, learned Deputy Governmerrt Advocate for the non-applicants No. 3 & 4. ORDER (05th February, 2808) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, CJ. Heard learned counsel for the parties on I.A. No. 01 (application for condonation of delay in fiting the restoration application). (2) On due consideratior?< of the submtssions of learned counsel for the partles, we are satisfied that the appticants have succeeded in showing sufficient cause for delay in filing the r^storation applicatton. (3) Therefore, t.A. No. 1 is allowed and the delay in filing restoratlon apptication is hereby condoned. (4) Heard learned counsel for the parties on the restoration application. (5) The applicants are seeking restoration of Wrlt Petition No. 1797^007 which was dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 17-12-2007. (6) On due consideration of the submissions of learned counset for the parties and the grounds taken in the restoration application, we are satisfied that the afc^ence of the applicants' counset on 17-12-2007 when W.P. No. 1797^2007 was taken up for hearing, was based on bona We grounds. Therefore, M.C.C. No. 46/2008 Is allowed and W.P. No. 1797/2007 is restored to its original number. , Sd/- Chief Justice ..^^. Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge