IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.658 of 2008 1(i) Bachu Yadav 1(ii) Parmeshwar Yadav 1(iii) Ram Charitar Yadav @ Ramanand Yadav 1(iv) Jagdish Yadav All sons of Late Baldeo Mahto 2. Most. Ritni Devi D/o Late Chanchal Mahto 3. Bato Mahton 4. Main Mahton @ Mannu Mahto 5. Bhagirath Mahto, all sons of Late Chanchal Mahto 6. Kumari Lado 7. Kumari Pato Both D/o Late Chanchal Mahto All residents of village Gohari, P.S.Lakhisarai, District Munger. …… Defendants-Appellants-Petitioners. Versus 1. Yugal Kishore Ram 2. Dukhan Ram Both sons of Chhotan Ram 3. Mainma Devi D/o Chhotan Ram All residents of village Gohari, P.S. Lakhisarai, District Munger. ……..Plaintiffs-Respondents-Opposite parties. For the petitioners : Mr. Narmadeshwar Jha, Advocate. For the opposite parties: Mr. V.M. K. Sinha, Advocate. ----------- 04/ 13.01.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the opposite parties. 2. The matter arises out of S.A. No.176 of 1986 which was filed by the appellants-petitioners challenging the judgments and decree of both the learned courts below. It transpires that the proceeding of the second appeal was delayed on one pretext or the other and when it was listed on 15.07.2002 for hearing under Order XLI Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, no one appeared on behalf of the appellants to press the said second appeal and hence it was dismissed for non-prosecution. 2 3. The petitioners filed M.J.C. No.499 of 2003 for restoration of the aforesaid second appeal which was allowed by this court vide order dated 24.10.2003 and second appeal was restored. Thereafter the said second appeal was again listed for hearing under Order XLI Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure on 09.04.2007 and on that date also no one appeared on behalf of the appellants to press the said second appeal which was thus again dismissed for non- prosecution. 4. M.J.C. No.1590 of 2007 was filed by the petitioners for restoration of the said second appeal but since there was some delay, the Lawazima Board vide its order dated 26.09.2007 directed the petitioners to file an interlocutory application for condoning the delay. The said order not having been complied, the matter was placed before this court on 18.01.2008 when learned counsel for the petitioners appeared and prayed for one week time to file an interlocutory application for condoning the delay. Accordingly the peremptory order was passed with respect thereto. The petitioners did not comply the aforesaid peremptory order of this court and hence M.J.C. No.1590 of 2007 was also dismissed. 5. Now, M.J.C. No.658 of 2008 has been filed for restoration of M.J.C. No.1590 of 2007. It transpires that S.A. No.176 of 1986 had remained pending for two decades due to the negligence or the acts of the appellants-petitioners and even thereafter they did not take any proper step due to which the said second appeal was dismissed twice and even the orders passed by the Lawazima Board as 3 well as by this court in M.J.C. No.1590 of 2007 were not complied. 6. These repeated non-appearance and non-compliance clearly show the attitude of the appellants-petitioners which does not deserve any sympathetic consideration. Accordingly, this petition bearing M.J.C. No.658 of 2008 is dismissed. harish (S.N. Hussain, J.)