'^m^ ^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI N.K. AGARWAL, J. Applicants Appellants Respondents M.C.C.No.179of2011 1 Umasharan, s/o Bhanuram Lodhi, aged about 41 years, r/o village Beltukri, PS Nandghat, Tahsil Nawagarh, District Durg (CG) (Driver of the vehicle) 2 Kamlanarayan, s/o Bhanuram Lodhi, Rajput, Aged about 35 years, R/o village Beltukri, PS Nandghat, Tahsil Nawagarh, District Durg (CG) (Owner of the vehicle) VERSUS 1. Indra Bai, widow of Dharmendra Banjare, Caste Satnami, aged about 22 years, Housewife 2. Ku Heena, d/o late Dharmendra Banjare, aged about 3 months, minor through her natural guardian mother Indra Bai 3. Panchram, s/o Samaru Satnami, aged about 50 years 4. Phulbasa Bai, w/o Panchram Satnami, aged about 47 years, Occupation Housewife All r/o village Patnakapa, PS Nandghat, Tahsil Nawagarh, District Durg (CG) Application for restoration of MAC No.766/2010 Present: Shri Arjunlal Gahavai, counsel for the petitioners. ORDER ?th (26tnJuly,2011) •^A,""^ 1j ^ '"""" " y/i \^y s) 1»»»^ The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Shri Arjunlal Gahavai, learned counsel for the petitioners is heard onl.A.No.01/2011, an application for condonation ofthe delay in filing the restoration petition. 2) On due consideration of the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners and the grounds taken in the application, we are satisfied that the petitioners have succeeded in showing sufficient cause for the delay in filing the restoration petition. 3) I.A.No.01/2011, therefore, is allowed and the delay in filing the restoration petition is hereby condoned. 4) Shri Arjunlal Gahavai, learned counsel for the petitioners is heard on the restoration petition. 5) The petitioners are seeking restoration of MAC No.766/2010, which was dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated29.11.2010. 6) On due consideration of the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners and the grounds taken in the restoration petition, we are satisfied that the absence of the petitioners'/appellants' counsel on 29.11.2010, when MAC No.766/2010 was taken-up for hearing, was based on bona fide grounds. 7) M.C.C. No. 179 of 2011, therefore, is allowed and MAC No.766/2010 is restored to its original number. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- N.K. Agarwal Judge ^