Khandu S/O Raoji Mankar (Since Deceased Thr. His Lrs) Smt. Chandrakala W/O Maroti Gawande And Other v. Purushottam S/O Parashram Mankar And 2 Others
cao581.17 & mca st.no.3390.17 49
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION (CAO) NO.581/2017 IN MCA ST.NO.3390/2017 IN SA. NO.323/2015 Khandu s/o Raoji Mankar (since deceased), thr. His LRs Smt. Chandrakala Gawande and ors ..vs..
Purushottam s/o Parashram Mankar and ors ....................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court orders or directions Court's or Judge's Order and Registrar's orders ....................................................................................................................................................... Shri S.S. Dhengale, Counsel for the applicants.
CORAM
: V.M. DESHPANDE, J.
DATED : DECEMBER 6, 2017.
1.
These are applications for condonation of delay and for restoration.
2.
The second appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution on 11.1.2017 since it was observed that on four occasions learned counsel for the appellants was absent. 3.
Notices on these applications for condonation of delay and for restoration were issued to the non-applicants. In spite of service, nobody appears for them.
4.
On 24.11.2017, these applications were listed for consideration. However, in order to give a chance to the nonapplicants to put their appearance, the matter was adjourned .....2/-
cao581.17 & mca st.no.3390.17 49 and is placed on Board today.
5.
According to the applications, wife of earlier counsel was having serious health issues and she was undergoing treatment at Spandan Hospital and, therefore, earlier counsel was unable to attend the Court. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.
6.
Statement of facts about ill-health of the wife of earlier counsel, which is supported by the discharge summary from the Spandan Hospital, is not controverted by the nonapplicants. 7.
In that view of the matter, both these applications are allowed. Delay in moving the application for restoration is hereby condoned. The application for restoration is allowed. Order dated 11.1.2017 is recalled.
8.
The appeal is restored to file and be placed for ADMISSION after Christmas Vacations 2017.
9.
The applications are allowed and disposed.
JUDGE !! BRW !!
...../-