The Patna High Court allowed an application for restoration of a writ petition dismissed for want of prosecution. The court found the petitioner did not act wilfully and directed the restoration of the file.
The application for restoration is allowed; CWJC No. 10130 of 2006 is restored to its original file.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.3236 of 2018
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10130 of 2006
======================================================
Sobhit Int Udyog through its Proprietor Ram Sobhit Prasad, Son of Shri Anand Prasad, Resident of Village- Ajna, P.O.- Gopalpur, P.S.- Kalyanpur, District- Samastipur (Bihar).
... ... Petitioner
Versus
... ... Opposite Parties
====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vinay Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. S.D Sanjay, Additional Solicitor General
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER
learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 1 and 2.
The instant application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for restoration of CWJC No.10130 of 2006, which was dismissed vide order dated 08.01.2018 for want of prosecution.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the
Patna High Court MJC No.3236 of 2018(4) dt.26-02-2020 2/2
petitioner that neither name of the conducting counsel for the petitioner was printed in the cause list nor SMS with respect to listing of the case was received by him, he could not attend the court when the case was called out for hearing in admission matter. Cconsequently, the writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution.
It is submitted that there is neither any deliberate nor wilful laches on the part of the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1 and 2 does not oppose the prayer of the petitioner for restoration of the writ petition.
Regard being had to the submissions made at the Bar, the application is allowed. CWJC No.10130 of 2006 is directed to be restored to its original file.
(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.)
Sanjeet/-
U
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition dismissed for want of prosecution should be restored upon showing non-receipt of listing advisories and absence of wilful laches.
Sobhit Int Udyog through its Proprietor Ram Sobhit Prasad
The Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Agriculture and Village Industries
Ashwani Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
