.^' HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J, M.C.C.No. 520 of 2011 ApDlicants 1. Kalia Bai w/o !ate Parmanand Kewat, aged about 38 years, 2. Onkar s/o late Parmanand Kewat, aged about 22 years, 3. Priti d/o late Parmanand Kewat, aged about 22 years, 4. Kirti d/o late Parmanand Kewat, aged about 16 years, 5. Sukhiya Bai w/o late Dwarika Prasad, aged about 62 years, For applicant No.4 minor wali mother Kalia Bai w/o late Parmanand All r/o village Chourel Tahsil Gunderdehi, district Durg C.G. Present Address c/o Dayalu Kalia Bai Printer Arjun Nagar, behind Graveyard Ramnagar Supela Bhilai, district Durg C.G. VERSUS j. Respondents Hafiz Khan s/o Guljar Khan aged about 40 years, driver of the Mini Bus C.G. 08 ZA/0135 r/o Motipur Rajnandgaon c/o Hanif Solanki M/s iCCnand Roadways Co. Old Ganj Chowk, Rajnandgaon C.G. M/s Anand Roadways through Hanif Solanki s/o Nuruddin Solanki R/o Old Ganj Chowk, Rajnandgaon. The New India Insurance Company Ltd., Head Office MG Road, Mumbai, ^y' -.f, "'^-•^ \ -ifi,--'~<-l ^..'^ 1 is%s^ i \ ^^/ MCCNo. 520 of 2011 ^ Branch Manager, Branch Office Kamthi Line, Rajnandgaon, Division Office, Power House Bhilai, distt. Durg C.G. ApDlication for restoration of MAC No.12/2006 Present: Shri C.K. Sahu, counsel for the petitioners. ORDER >th (12InAagust,2011) The following order of the Couri: was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Shri C.K. Sahu, learned counsel for the petitioners is heard on I.A.No.01/2011, an application for condonation ofthe delay in filing the restoration petition. 2) On due consideration of the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners and the grounds taken in the application, we are satisfied that the petitioners have succeeded in showing sufficient cause for the delay in filing the restoration petition. 3) I.A.No.01/2011, therefore, is allowed and the delay in filing the restoration petition is hereby condoned. 4) Shri C.K. Sahu, learned counsel for the petitioners is heard on the restoration petition. 5) The petitioners are seeking restoration of M.A (C) No.12 of 2006, which was dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 17.03.2011. \ ^SS&i-^,^ \ ^^gK;.^^;^^ ^ /• y MCCNo. 520 of 2011 subbu -'<. 6) On due consideration of the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners and the grounds taken in the restoration petition, we are satisfied that the absence of the petitioners'/appellants' counsel on 17.03.2011, when M.A(C) No.12 of 2006 was taken-up for hearing, was based on bona fide grounds. 7) M.C.C. No. 520 of 201lTtherefore, is allowed and M.A (C) No.12 of 2006 is restored to its original number. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R-N.Chandrakar Judge [