IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR rC.G.) M.C.CNo. •z of2010 (SECOND APPEAL N0. 91 OF 2000) APPLICANTS APPELLANTS pi.eswfr* •> ^ -^ S^\ Dat6d...----^^e ^ Anish Kumar, S/o Shankar Lal, aged about 28 years, Rakesh Kumar, S/o Kanhaiyalal, aged about 19 years, Vikas Kumar, S/o Basant Kumar, aged about 19 years, All resident of Baloda Bazar, District Raipur (M.P.) (Now C.G.) VERSUS RESPQNDENTS l^w^^l !^-s^ ^yf^'"^"''"3' /^ Madhusudan Das Vaishnav, S/o Shri Harbhushan Das Vaishnav, R/o Risda, Tahsil Baloda Bazar, District Raipur (M.P.) (Now C.G.) Surendra Kumar Vaishnav, S/o Shri Harbhushan Das Vaishnav, aged about 50 years, R/o Risda, Tahsil Baloda Bazar, District Raipur (M.P.) (NowC.G.) APPLICATION FOR RESTORATIQN OF THE SECOND APPEAL N0. '^f': 91/2000 "ANISH KUMARAND OTHERS VS. MADHUSUDAN DAS VAISHNAV AND ANOTHER" ^?^^^|Ks^^ •^^^^E%^!S is'^i '...•••f' • . •^.'T: -f »?- :'c^. HIGHCOimTC?F<aHI^TItISeaWBJ mi<AS^ " : ! • -M.C.C.1- Ho.' 3l8;<rf' .2010' l'~ : . '•• "/ . •,. , -:: AFpucywra APRBIAANTS REsponDEWrs 1. 2, 3. VERSUS l.:' '" 2. Aatefa Kaaiffl, S/o SIiaakarLal,aged about 28 yGars, RalseshKuiaarS/Q^Kan3haQ?a]at,;ag!ed abo'utISyears, Mkas Kuniai^ S/o Basaat Kumar, agcd About 19 years, AU resident of Bsloda Bazar, DistciiBt Raqnir p.P; ) (Now G.0.)< Madhusudaa ©mVaishaaw, S/o Stul Haitobushaa Das VaashnaK, ; Rfo Rfada,Tahsil Baloda Ba^u, Bistrict Raqnu:(M,P.) fNcwG.G.). Surendia Kuinar VairfuBW, S/o Shn HarbhusfaanDas Vaisfaaav, ayed about 50 years, R/o RKda, Talisil Baloda Bazar, Ettstrkrt Raipur (M.P.) (NowC.G^. JUPPUCATKMI FOiR RESTORAaCTtMftW^raat ..MHHiafejeo.' 91/20^^'aiBE^ KJMMAR^^A^ ;VXl8HIlAW^AlmKAlIOOTIE^'r;':.^ •:.''::^»^Htoui^>te,Ilir..TJ^SlMuma,J.). Present:-ShnBhMkar Pyasi^Advocatefet^ ORAL-ORDBR (Klssedon 30/06/201<n Heaiil on I.A. No. I appUeatiQn for <x»ulonatk>n a{ Seley in fiting Ite applfcaffoa fiir restoration of Secori^^^^^j^^ 91/2000 dasnusS^fiM- want gf pTosecutioa Adde order dated 1/4/10, Leained couia^:te tltc applicaffts sutomi^ Vakalatnama jn the seeond appeal on 12/3/10 butMsasuac has aot becn mentioiicd m fhe eause Ist therefiMe teewas not ja position to appear in such appeal on 1/4/10. Whea Me came to knciw flie aforesaid faets fheB Iias filed fte ^applipatjMi fiir testcas^i^ of -(be sype^ s^^^a^^ '^.: /• » :.:» Uifl fe^\ ^: i -z 3. 4. delay ia fiUng the appUcation. Order reveal tha Shri S.K. Beribal coiinsel for respondent No, 2 was present on fhat day. Considering the groiuids Dientioned in the appUcation I.A. No. 1 is atfcwed. Delay in filing the restoradon appUcation is hereby condoaed. On due consideration appUcation for restoration crf Second Appeal is also aUowed. Second Appcal No. 91/2000 dismissed for want. of prosccution is restored ia its or^inal nuinber. In origmal appeal appUcants shall take steps for issiiance of process to the respondents aad after semce of notice second appeal shall be heard. Registiy K directed to laention flie name of Shri Bhaskar Pyashi Advocate for fhe appellants in fhe cause list. No order as to costs. Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge