M/s Dabur India Ltd vs. Tara Chand & others. RSA No. 108 of 2018 20.05.2026 Present: Ms. Seema K. Guleria, Advocate, for the appellant. Ms. Srishti Negi, Advocate vice Mr. Shivam Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr. Praveen Sharma, Advocate, vice Mr. Sanjay Ranja, Advocate, for respondent No.2 CMP No. 11500 of 2026 The instant application has been filed for the restoration of the appeal which was dismissed by this Court for non-prosecution vide order dated on 30.03.2026, the relevant portion whereof reads as under: “On 27.02.2026, it was pointed out that during the pendency of the appeal, respondent No.3 Layak Ram has expired and time was granted to the learned counsel for the appellant to take consequential steps but no steps have been taken till date. At the persuasive request of the learned counsel for the appellant, last and final opportunity of one week time is granted to take consequential steps, failing which, the present appeal shall be dismissed for non-prosecution without reference to the Court.” Now the instant application has been filed on the grounds of bonafide and inadvertent mistake, that the applicant/appellant was under the impression that four weeks’ time had been granted to take the necessary steps. Accordingly, the officials of the applicant/appellant started making inquiry qua the legal representatives of proforma respondent No.3 and they filed an application under Order 22 Rule 4 C.P.,C within four weeks, however, were apprised that the case has been dismissed for non-prosecution as they have failed to take steps within one week from 30.3.2026. It has been averred in the application that non-compliance was neither intentional nor willful and the same has occurred due to unavoidable circumstances. Therefore, it has been prayed that after recalling the order dated 30.03.2026, whereby the appeal was dismissed for non prosecution, the present appeal be restored. Keeping in view the averments as made in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit and in view of submissions especially in paras 3,4 and 5 of the application, this Court is satisfied that ground has been made out for allowing of the present application. Consequently, the present application is allowed and the appeal is restored to its original number, by extending time for taking consequential steps on death of proforma respondent No.3. Application stands disposed off. RSA No. 108 of 2018 It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant/appellant that consequential steps for bringing on record the legal representatives of proforma respondent No.3 have already been taken and appropriate application has been filed in the Registry of this Court. Registry is directed to trace the same and place it on record, if in order. List thereafter ( Romesh Verma) Judge May 20, 2026 ( veena)