AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
In connection with the aforesaid application, the petitioner has filed C.A.N.4774 of 2018 which is an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act praying for condonation of delay in filing the above application for restoration of F.M.A. 958 of 2005.
It is stated by the petitioners that on 7th January, 2018,on which date the above numbered appeal was fixed for haring, learned Advocate for the petitioners could not remain present before the Court when the matter was called on for hearing as he was engaged in some other Court.
It is further pleaded by the petitioners that they could not take immediate steps for restoration of the appeal on the ground of a prolonged cease work observed by the Members of the Bar of this Court on certain issues from the Month of February, 2018. Only after the said cease work was called off, the petitioners were able to contact their Learned Advocate and only on 25th June, 2018 an application was filed for obtaining the certified copy of the order of dismissal of the appeal. Finally on 12th July, 2018 the application for restoration along with the application for condonation of delay in filing the said application were filed.
I have heard Learned Advocate for the appellants/petitioners.
I have also perused the aforesaid applications.
In my view the cause shown by the petitioners in support of the condonation of delay in filing the application for restoration is sufficient and delay should be condoned.
In view of the above discussion, C.A.N. 4774 of 2018 is allowed .
Accordingly, C.A.N. 4770 of 2018 is also allowed.
F.M.A. 958 of 2005 be restored to its position in file.
C.A.N. 4771 of 2018 is an application for restoration of F.M.A. 969 of 2005 which was dismissed for default by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court by an order dated 7th January, 2018.
In connection with the aforesaid application, the petitioner has filed C.A.N.4772 of 2018 which is an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act praying for condonation of delay in filing the above application for restoration of F.M.A. 969 of 2005.
It is stated by the petitioners that on 7th January, 2018,on which date the above numbered appeal was fixed for haring, learned Advocate for the petitioners could not remain present before the Court when the matter was called on for hearing as he was engaged in some other Court.
It is further pleaded by the petitioners that they could not take immediate steps for restoration of the appeal on the ground of a prolonged cease work observed by the members of the Bar of this Court on certain issues from the Month of February, 2018. Only after the said cease work was called off, the petitioners were able to contact their Learned Advocate and only on 25th June, 2018 an application was filed for obtaining the certified copy of the order of dismissal of the appeal. Finally on 12th July, 2018 the application for restoration along with the application for condonation of delay in filing the said application were filed.
I have heard Learned Advocate for the appellants/petitioners.
I have also perused the aforesaid applications.
In my view the cause shown by the petitioners in support of the condonation of delay in filing the application for restoration is sufficient and delay should be condoned.
In view of the above discussion C.A.N. 4771 of 2018 is allowed .
Accordingly, C.A.N. 4772 of 2018 is also allowed.
Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties on compliance of necessary formalities.