1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR Civil Application [CAO] No. 372 of 2011 AND Misc. Civil Application St. No. 2176 of 2011 IN First Appeal No. 266 of 2006 [Prakash R. Chokhani Vs. Ms. Sarala Ashok Shah] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Mr. C.S. Kaptan, Adv., for the applicant. Mr. S.S. Shingane, Adv., holding for Adv. Mr. A.S. Kilor for respondent sole. ----- CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI AND A.P. BHANGALE, JJ. DATE : 02nd September, 2011. 1. Heard learned Adv. Mr. C.S. Kaptan for the applicant and learned Adv. Mr. S.S. Shingane appearing for Adv. Mr. Kilor for respondent. 2. Prayer is to condone delay of 1272 days in filing Misc. Civil Application for restoration of First Appeal No. 266 of 2006. The appeal has been dismissed on 12th October, 2007. 3. Mr. Kaptan, by placing reliance upon 2 affidavit, states that the order of Court giving time for removal of office objections conditionally was not noted. He contends that objection as raised was, in fact, misconceived. In this situation dismissal could not come to the notice of counsel for appellant immediately. After getting knowledge of that dismissal through appellant only, the applications have been moved. According to him, there are not malafides. 4. Mr. Shingane is strongly opposing the prayers. He contends that reasons put forth cannot be accepted. He further states that suit was for specific performance. 5. We find that First Appeal challenging the decree for specific performance filed in the year 2006 was admitted by this Court on 19th June, 2006. Execution of decree was also stayed. Thereafter, on 28th September, 2007, this Court gave appellant time of two weeks to remove objections, and also directed that appeal would stand dismissed automatically if objections were not removed. This order escaped attention and hence appeal came to be dismissed in default. 6. The delay is huge, but it is only because of the dismissal escaping attention. We do not see any mala fides on the part of applicant in the matter. 7. Hence the order dismissing the appeal 3 in default passed on 12th October, 2007 is hereby recalled and First Appeal No. 266 of 2006 is restored back to file. 8. The appellant shall arrange to remove the office objections, if any, within a period of four weeks from today. 9. Mr. Shingane with Adv. Kilor waives notice upon restoration. Judge Judge |Hedau|