1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. MISC.CIVIL APPLN. NO.873 OF 2008 IN C.P.NO.108/2005. (ANGESH PRABHUNATH RAUT Vs SECRETARY, HIRABAI GAIKWAD EDN.SOC.& OTH.) _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders ______________________________________________________________________________________________ CORAM : B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : AUGUST 11, 2008. 1. Heard Shri Kshirsagar, learned Advocate for the applicant and Shri Gordey, learned Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2. 2. Shri Kshirsagar, states that though there are two judgments of this Court holding that the contempt petition dismissed in default cannot be restored, as the cause of action in this matter still continues, it will be in the fitness of things to restore the matter instead of requiring the applicant to file fresh contempt petition. 2 3. Shri Gordey, learned Advocate opposes the request. He states that both the judgments hold that the Court has no such power to order restoration. In view of the judgments, reported at 2004(2) Mh.L.J. 1047 (Panjabrao Sadashivrao Wankhede Vs. Rajeev Agrawal), 2006(2) Mh.L.J. 256 (Damodar Sadashiv Agre Vs. K.K. Prasad & oth.) the present application is not maintainable. Since the cause of action is still surviving, the applicant is at liberty to take appropriate steps in the matter. JUDGE RR.