JYOTILAL MAHATO Vs. UDHIR MAHATO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this CMP. the petitioners have prayed for restoration of FA No. 163 of 1969, which was dismissed for default on 3rd January, 1985.

(2.) IT has been stated that the said first appeal was filed in the Patna High Court. Patna and was admitted. Notices were issued. Respondents had appeared. Requisites were also deposited and the appeal was to be heard finally. In the meanwhile, the appellant No. 2, Haripada Mahato, who was looking after the case on behalf of the appellants, fell seriously ill and ultimately died. Other appellants were not in the know of the progress of the appeal. In the meanwhile, Ranchi Bench of the Patna High Court was constituted and all the cases arising out of the territorial jurisdiction of Ranchi Bench were normally transferred to Ranchi Bench. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the remaining appellants were in the hope that their case, which arises out of the land situated within Singhbhum District, shall be transferred to Ranchi Bench and they will get fresh notice, but even after a long wait, when they did not get any notice, they enquire about the case and traced out that their appeal was dismissed as far back as in the year 1985.

(3.) THE petitioners traced out the case, but after a long lapse of time of several years. But, there was no intentional laches on the part of the petitioners.