1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. C.A. No. 61 of 2010 In MCA (St) No. 9618 of 09 Smt Farhatunnisa and v. Sayed and ors -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's Orders. Mr M.K. Kulkarni, Adv for applicant Dr R. S. Sunderam, Adv for respdt no. 2 Coram : A.P. Bhangale, J Dated : 16.7.2010 Heard learned counsel for the parties. There is delay of one year and 54 days caused in filing application for restoration of appeal which was dismissed for failure on the part of appellant to file private paper book. It is stated in the application that appellants were not aware of the conditional order passed in the appeal which was admitted. It is common knowledge that private paper book is to be filed only after admission of the appeal. Moreover, whenever case comes up before the Court, it is notified in the cause list. Therefore, it does not lie in the mouth of the appellants that they were not aware of the conditional order passed in the appeal. Court cannot show sympathy to the lethargic litigants like appellants in the present case. It is stated in the reply filed on behalf of respondents that after the death of original appellant, her legal heirs have entered into compromise out of the court and they have resolved the dispute. It is further stated that even appellant no.2 has entered into compromise 2 and received benefit out of the said compromise. For all these reasons, no fruitful purpose would be served in condoning the delay and restoring the appeal. Application is rejected accordingly. Judge. joshi