GANGA PRASAD Vs. AJAB NARAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) M. evaraj, J. This restoration application has been filed on 3-6-2004 against the order dated 26-3-2004.

(2.) HEARD the counsels for both the parties. The learned counsel for applicant argued that since the clerk had wrongly noted the date, he was not present in the Court on 26-3-2004 and hence the restoration application has been dismissed for want of prosecution; that the client should not suffer for the mistake on the part of his counsel; he has filed application under Section 5 of Limitation Act to condone the delay if any; though the application against the order dismissing the restoration application can be filed within three years and finally argued that this restoration application may be allowed. He drew my attention towards 1993 ACJ 202, 1981 AIR 1400, 1993 RD 116, 1986 RD 134 and 1985 AWC 347.