restoration of MA. 2) The petitioners is\ seeking No.343/2004, which was dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 01 -1 1 -2004. 3) On due consideration of the submissions of learned counsei for the petitioner/appeiiant, we are satisiied that the absence of the petitioner’s/appettant’s counsel on 01-11—2004 when MA. No.343/2004 was taken up for hearing, was based on bone tide grounds. 4) M.C.C. No. 155/2004, therefore, is atiowed and MA. No.343/2004 is restored to its original number. V_Q 7 t Sd/- M CHIEF Sd/- JUSTICE unil Kamal‘ Judge Sinha g i I“ m“ ms if o s { I