(1.) Civil Application No. 12410 of 2005 has been filed by Union of India and other applicants, original appellants, seeking condonation of delay of 49 days in filing the restoration application being Misc. Civil Application Stamp No.2879 of 2005. The First Appeal came to be dismissed for want of prosecution on 31st August 2005 by a Division Bench of this Court (Coram: R.S.Garg & K.M.Mehta, JJ). At the time of hearing the Civil Application for condonation of delay of which rule has been issued and duly served on the respondents, learned advocate Shri S.M.Shah appearing for the respondents with learned advocate Shri M.A.Parekh submitted that both the applications, i.e. Civil Application lor condonation of delay as well as the Misc. Civil Application for restoration of the First Appeal be heard together. He submitted that since the grounds available to the respondents to oppose condonation of delay and restoration of appeal are common, both the applications be heard simultaneously. At his request, therefore, Civil Application for condonation of delay as well as Misc. Civil Application for restoration were heard together.
(2.) We have heard Mr. Jitendra Malkan, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India for Union of India and on behalf of the opponent we have heard Mr. S.M. Shah, learned advocate with Mr. M.A. Parekh, learned advocate.
(3.) Mr. Malkan, learned Asst. Solicitor General of India, states that when the aforesaid appeal was admitted on 3.11.1989 and when the matter was actually heard on 30.8.2005, the learned Central Government Standing Counsel appearing at the relevant point of time had been changed. The Department could not apprise the newly appointed Assistant Solicitor General as the Department was not aware about the listing of the matter before the Court. Thereafter, the Department came to know about the dismissal of the matter only on 27.10.2005 when the appellant received copy of the order passed by this Court from the learned Civil Judge (S.D.), Anand, on that day.