MANI LAL KALAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE have heard learned counsel for the appellant.

(2.) THE learned Single Judge has refused to restore the writ petition. We have perused the application for restoration of the writ petition. We are satisfied that there existed sufficient reasons which prevented the learned counsel for the appellant to appear before the Court when the case was called. We have observed in Rajasthan State Industrial Development & Investment Corporation Ltd. , Jodhpur vs. M/s. Modi Threat Mills, Jodhpur (RLW 2003 (4) Raj. 2192) that refusal to restore an appeal is bound to result in meritorious matter being thrown out and the cause of justice will be defeated. In another matter, whereby, a division Bench of this Court refused to condone the delay in filing the application for condonation of delay, the Hon'ble Apex Court condoned the delay and restored the matter. THE case has been remitted to this Court for decision on merit. for the convenience, the order of the Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in Civil appeal No. 872/04 (State of Rajasthan & Anr. vs. Sal Khan & Ors.) dated 6. 02. 2004 is extracted as follows: " THE High Court proceeded to consider the matter only on the ground that it had passed peremptory order which had not been complied with diligence by the appellants in pursuing the matter and the appeal was liable to be dismissed. But on consideration of the facts, it appears that the appellants had taken due steps within reasonable time and certain explanation had also been given as to why they could not comply with the order of the High Court within the High Court ought to have condoned the delay and restored the matter. the High Court not having done so, we do it now. We set aside the order passed by the High Court and the appeal shall stand restored to its original number for fresh disposal in accordance with law. THE appeal is allowed accordingly. "