and 2. The application in E.A.No.122 of 1982 originally stood posted on 8.7.2004 for the examination of petitioner (PW1). Since the revision petitioner counsel was not present on that date, it was adjourned to 19.7.2004. Since the advocates of Panruti Bar Association had boycotted the court on that date, the petition in E.A.No.122 of 1982 was adjourned to 21.07.2004. On that date, the petitioner (PW1) was present. However, one Mr.Krishnaraj, an advocate had requested the Court on behalf of the petitioner to post the matter on the next day. One Mr.E.Pushpalingam, one of the counsels of Panruti Bar Association who had withdrawn his appearance on behalf of Respondent long back had represented this Court saying that the matter was repeatedly adjourned for several hearings and therefore, he had vehemently objected for the adjournment. But the court based on his representation, had dismissed the petition in E.A.No.122 /1982 for non-prosecution. Therefore, the respondents had come forward with the above said application in E.A.No.399 of 2004 to set aside the order of dismisssal dasted 21.07.2004.
