(C.G.) (0788- 2321596) v. Non-ADDlJcanh State of Chhattisaarh Throuah 1, Secretary State of Chhattisgarh Public Works

Shri Vipin Tiwari, counsel foi) the applicant. Heard on M.C.P.No. 161/2007 ', application for condonation ofdelay •c. v- in filing the restoration application P /I.C.C.No. 35/07 as the same has been preferred with a delay of three day^ as per office note dated 19.1.2007. Taking into consideration the reasons assigned in M.C.P.No. 161/07, which is duly supported by an affidavit ofcounsel for the appiicant, the application is aliowed. Deia^ f in fiting the restoration application is condoned. Also heard on M.C.C.No. 35r !07. Learned counsel for the aplpiicant submjts that the appticant had preferred an application under S< ^ction 11(6)(A) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before th^ District Judge, Bilaspur which was transferred to this Court on the gr|3und'that the District Judge ceases to have jurisdiction to deal with the a^plication under Section 11 (6)(A) of the Act. The appljcation was posted] for hearing on 12.12.2006 before this Court, however, on that date the |app!ication was dismissed for want of prosecution. It is submitted tha| hafc on 12.12.2006 the counsel for the applicant could not appear when th|e matter was called as he had gone out XI-HC-78 3=ET ^lNlcn^^ ^Tfi^^Ko, fsK-IWy +11*1^11 Sh+lich •• • • • •"• •»••••<^» «J* •• • • • ^ 2007 311^1 <^5ich ('idt^^) 3TT^T^)T^i<=h cT^T3TT^T5h^l<=h ^TT^T^fN^n^T cbi^f<n41-i ^i^KnT^te^iF^^K ^)3Tf^R'3T1^T of station. The appiication is duly supported by the affidavit of counsel for the applicant. In view of above, the appl ication {M.C.C.No. 35/2007} is allowed and office is directed to restore th^ M.C.C. 217/2006 to its original number subject to the condition that the a^plicant deposits a sum of Rs. 500/- with ^" the Secretary, High Court Legal Ai^ Committee within 15 days from today. r- Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge