AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15764 of 2014
With
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6073 of 2017
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15764 of 2014
==========================================================
HOMIBHAI JAHANGIRJI ... application. Referring to provisions of Order IX Rule 4 read with
Section 141 of the Code. Mr.Shah submitted that the application for
restoration
under Rule 109-A of U.P.C.H. Rules.
12.01.2011
Restoration application dated 30.07.2010 filed on behalf of the petitioner against the order dated ... dated 09.04.2012 has been dismissed by the D.D.C.
29.05.2017
Restoration application dated 15.08.2016 filed on behalf of the petitioner against the order dated
under Rule 109-A of U.P.C.H. Rules.
12.01.2011
Restoration application dated 30.07.2010 filed on behalf of the petitioner against the order dated ... dated 09.04.2012 has been dismissed by the D.D.C.
29.05.2017
Restoration application dated 15.08.2016 filed on behalf of the petitioner against the order dated
hence, the claim petition is dismissed in default."
Thereafter, an application (Restoration Application No.103 of 2009) for recall of the order dated ... order dated 01.10.2009. The same reads as under :-
"A restoration application has been filed to recall the order dated 02.09.2004 and has been prayed
decided ex parte on 16.1.2004 against the petitioner, as such, restoration application dated 30.4.2004 was filed by the petitioner inter alia that they ... reasonable basis for setting aside the order on restoration application, the application for restoration/recall was rejected.
21. The petitioner has come up in this
Judge, Family Court, Jhansi in Misc. CaseNo. 25/89 rejecting her restoration application along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation ... same we are satisfied that a case for restoration has been made out. The restoration application is accordingly allowed and the ex-parte decree
came to be dismissed on 07.01.2023 for non prosecution. A restoration application was preferred by the opposite party no.2 on 16.03.2023 for recalling ... recall application dismissing in default the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and further there were adequate grounds mentioned in the restoration application itself
petitioner moved an application stating that as no substitution application was moved within three months, the restoration application of Smt. Lilawati be dismissed as having ... petitioner sought abatement of restoration application by means of application-dated 6.6.1989. The purpose of moving substitution application is to allow suit or proceeding
delay in
filing such application. So, the plaintiff appears to have filed
an impugned application below Exhibit 8 in the restoration
application - Civil Miscellaneous Application ... allowed the application of the
plaintiff filed below Exhibit 8 in Civil Miscellaneous
Application No. 62 of 2022 and, consequently, rejected the
restoration application solely
filing of amendment application and there is no explanation
whatsoever either in the adjournment application or in the restoration
application as to why an amendment ... order dated 5th January, 2018 in the MARJI Application
holding the said application for restoration as not maintainable in view of
incorrect application of Order
