SANJAY DAGADAPPA KAPSE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD.

(2.) THE applicant/petitioner has filed this application for restoration of the writ petition, which was dismissed in default. We see no reason why the petitioner filed this application if the petition has been dismissed in default and it came to the notice of the Advocate on the very same day. The Advocate could have sought restoration of the matter on an oral application. We are constrained to make this observation since too often applications or motions in writing for restoration come up for orders before the Court, though the dismissal came to the knowledge of the Advocates on the same day.

(3.) IN (P. D. Shamdasani Vs. The Central bank of India Ltd.), 1938 (40) Bom. L. R. 238; a Special Bench of this Court observed in that case, the negligence was exceedingly slight and the discretion not to restore the matter was exercised on wrong basis. In regard to matters which are dismissed for non appearance and an application is made by the party for restoration, it was observed as follows:-