1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1367 OF 2008 IN SUMMARY SUIT NO.344 OF 1987 M/s.National Marketing Agencies ....Plaintiff V/s. M/s.Jain Transport Co. & Ors. ....Defendants And Smt.Radha Rani wd/o Vas Deo Kalra & Anr. ....Respondents Ms.Kavita Lalwani for the Plaintiff. Ms.Leena R. Temkar for Defendant No.3 and the Respondents. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATE : 17TH DECEMBER, 2009. P.C. :- 1. Although an advocate did appear on behalf of the Plaintiff (admittedly wrongly mentioned as having appeared for the Defendants in the order dated 3.7.2007) the suit requires to be restored to the file in the facts and circumstances of this case. 2. The Plaintiff’s advocate having to travel abroad, had entrusted the matter to a colleague. The colleague in turn requested his junior to appear. There was obviously a communication gap resulting in the learned advocate not having the necessary instructions to prosecute the suit on merits leading to the dismissal thereof. 3. In these circumstances, the Plaintiff ought not to suffer an order 2 of dismissal of a suit on that account. The suit has otherwise been prosecuted diligently for twenty years. 4. In the circumstances, the Notice of Motion is made absolute in terms of prayers (a), (b) and (c).