trial court while passing the order for restoration, having
considered facts stated in the restoration application and rejoinder and
being satisfied with the cause shown ... impugned order as the application for
restoration was earlier dismissed for non prosecution.
We have perused the restoration application as well as petition filed
under
application is required and the delay can be condoned on
the basis of averments in the application for the restoration
of the suit, the separate ... said
that the order of restoration has been passed
without condoning the delay in filing the
restoration application. The submission of the
learned counsel appearing
entitled to also entertain an
application seeking to condone the delay in filing the application for
restoration. The position, however, in the instant reference pertains ... application has to be made for a copy of the order. This is so for the
reason that an application for restoration would
Petition has already been dismissed in default
and it was the restoration application, which has also been moved after
inordinate delay, accompanied with application seeking ... status of the restoration application as well the application seeking
condonation of delay. (which were filed for restoration of the Writ Petition)
11. There
application. In fact,
the application being Misc. Civil Application
No. 109 of 1997 was for condonation of delay in
filing the application for restoration ... suit. However, the respondents have given
impression in the application that, such
application was for restoration without mentioning
that the said application was for condonation
application
within such period."
12. In order to seek condonation of delay in filing an appeal or an
application, say an application for restoration ... composite
application for restoration of the suit and condonation of delay in
seeking the restoration. On reading the said application, it is clear
that
averments in the application,
forcing the workmen to lead oral evidence. The employer also
questioned the maintainability of the application for restoration on
the ground ... that such application had to be filed within 30 days and
the Industrial Court has no jurisdiction to entertain an application
for restoration, if made
averments in the application,
forcing the workmen to lead oral evidence. The employer also
questioned the maintainability of the application for restoration on
the ground ... that such application had to be filed within 30 days and
the Industrial Court has no jurisdiction to entertain an application
for restoration, if made
indicates that an application
for restoration was also filed which was registered as MCC
No.2289/2007. This restoration application was also dismissed ... application as
instructed by the petitioner. This application was also
dismissed on 20.9.2010 and therefore, another application
MCC No.337/2011 was filed for restoration
separate execution application or any application
other than the said miscellaneous application No.99 of 2010 (e.g.
an application seeking "restoration ... that, and by
treating the said application as if, the said application is an
application (i.e. 'restoration application') which would fall within
