IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.2023 of 2010 1(a). Munni Devi, daughter of Late Chandeshwar Rai, wife of Shri Uttam Chandra Singh, Police Line, Dandus Point S.Andman. 1(b). Miss Rinku Singh, daughter of late Devanti Singh at present living with her father Dinesh Singh at Quarter No.536 “A” Bichia Railway Colony, Gorakhpur, U.P. 1(c) Miss Tinku Singh, daughter of late Devanti Singh, at present living with her father Dinesh Singh at Quarter No.536 “A” Bichia Railway Colony, Gorakhpur, U.P. 1(d). Smt. Indu Singh, daughter of Late Chandeshwar Rai @ Chandeshwar Singh, wife of Shri Prabhunath Singh of village- Bachhar, Post Office- Salampur, District- Devaria, U.P. 1(e) Smt. Vajayanti Singh, daughter of late Chandeshwar Rai, @ Chandeshwar Singh, wife of Tarkeshwar Singh of village- Majhaulia, Post Office- Lar Bazar, District- Devaria, U.P. 1(f) Smt. Gayatri Singh, daughter of late Shri Chandeshwar Singh, wife of Vindhyachal Singh of village- Pipra Chouraha, New Neha Electronic Centre, Post Office- Lar Bazar, District- Dewaria, U.P. 1(g) Shri Narendra Kumar Singh, son of late Chandeshwar Rai of village- Dhamour, Post Office- Sarharwa, District- Siwan (Bihar). 1(h) Sri Rabindra Kumar Singh, son of late Chandeshwar Rai alias Chandeshwar Singh of Village- Dhamour, Post Office- Sarharwa, District- Siwan, Bihar. 2. Harendra Singh @ Harendra Rai, son of Janak Rai. 3. Paihari Singh @ Paihari Rai, son of Rajaram Rai. 4. Jagdish Singh @ Jagdish Rai, son of Rajaram Rai. 5. Devendra Kumar Singh @ Devendra Rai, son of Rajaram Rai. All are resident of Village- Dhamour, P.S. Miarwa, District- Siwan. ….Defendant-Appellants- Petitioners. Versus MANAGER RAI, son of Ram Briksh Rai @ Briksha Rai, resident of Village- Dhamaur, P.S. Mairwa, District- Siwan. …..Plaintiff-respondent- Opp. Party. ----------- 2 07- 22.06.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. This application has been filed by the appellants of F.A. No.156 of 1993, for restoration of the appeal which stood dismissed on account of non-compliance of the peremptory order passed by the Bench on 15.9.2003. 2. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. The appeal arises out of partition suit which was decreed. By order dated 25.7.2003, passed in the appeal, as prayed for by learned counsel for the appellants, the learned Lawazima Board had granted thirty days’ final time to file the appellants’ list and deposit of initial printing costs. Not having been complied with, it was placed before the Bench on 15.9.2003, on which date three weeks’ time was granted for the purpose. Not having been complied with, the appeal stood dismissed. The present restoration application was filed after delay of nearly seven years. It appears to be a case of laches and negligence. 3. This application is rejected. (S K Katriar, J.) S.K.Pathak/