1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6901 OF 2009 Mangalprabhu Foundations & Ors. .. Petitioners versus Sanjay Govind Potnis & Ors. .. Respondents Mr.S.G.Ganbavale for the petitioners. Mr.Hiranandani /by C.G.Gavnekar for respondent No.2. Mr.P.M.Shah for respondent Nos.3 to 7. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 23rd February 2010. P.C.: . Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent and the learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.3 to 7. The suit filed by the petitioners was dismissed for non prosecution by order dated 18th July 2008 on the ground that the petitioners failed to pay costs of Rs. 500/- in terms of order passed on 6th June 2008. On the very day on which suit was dismissed an application for restoration was made by the petitioners. The said application has been rejected by the learned trial Judge. 2. The opposition of the learned counsel appearing for the 3rd to 7th respondents is that the suit is simplicitor for injunction and no purpose will be served by restoring the suit. He submitted that there is no ground made out by the petitioners to restore the suit. He submitted that there is a delay in filing the writ petition. The learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent also supported the impugned order and submitted that no case is made out for restoration of the suit. 2 3. It is true that there is a delay in approaching this Court. The order has been passed on 18th July 2008 and the present petition is filed in August 2009. However, the suit filed by the petitioners has been dismissed as petitioners failed to pay costs in terms of order dated 6th June 2008. An application for restoration of suit was made on very day in which undertaking of the petitioners was recorded to pay the costs. As application was made on the very day, the suit ought to have been restored. 4. As far as delay in filing the petition is concerned, the concerned respondents can be compensated by ordering payment of costs. 5. Hence, petition is disposed of by passing following order: : O R D E R : (a) The impugned order is quashed and set aside and Suit No.314 of 2007 is restored subject to condition of the petitioner complying with order dated 6th June 2008 within a period of four weeks from today. (b) The petitioners are directed to pay costs of Rs.2,500/- to the 2nd respondent. The petitioners are directed to pay costs of Rs.7,000/- to respondent Nos.3 to 7. Payment of costs will be condition precedent. If the costs amount is not paid or deposited with the trial Court within a period of six weeks from today, the order of dismissal of suit will stand. (A.S.OKA,J)