IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No.896 of 2024 ------ 1. Balia Majhi, aged about 71 years. 2. Chandrai Majhi, aged about 60 years. Both sons of Late Kade Majhi. 3. Smt. Parwati Murmu, aged about 60 years, widow of Late Anup Majhi. 4. Sunil Kumar Majhi, aged about 32 years son of Late Anup Majhi. 5. Deepak Kumar Majhi, aged about 26 years, son of Late Anup Majhi. All are residents of Village Bagraisai, P.O. Govindpur, P.S. Rajnagar, District Singhbhum West. … Petitioners Versus 1. Chando Manjhi, son of Late Arjun Majhi. 2. Tuklu Manjhi son of Late Mundra Manjhi. Both are residents of Village Pandugite, P.O. Govindpur, P.S. Rajnagar, District West Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 3. The Deputy Commissioner, West Singhbhum, P.O. and P.S. Chaibasa, District West Singhbhum at Chaibasa. … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Ashutosh Mishra, Advocate For the Opp. Parties : Mr. Praveen Akhauri, SC (Mines) I Mr. Saibal Mitra, Advocate Ms. Sangita Choudhary, Advocate ------ Order No:-05 Dated:-10-01-2025 Heard the parties. This Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer for restoration of S.A. No.181 of 2003 to its original file which stood dismissed for non-prosecution vide order dated 08.07.2024. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that S.A. No.181 of 2003 stood dismissed for non-prosecution vide order dated 08.07.2024. It is next submitted that S.A. No.181 of 2003 was listed before this Bench and inadvertently due to weak signal of internet, the learned counsel for the appellants could not connect with the website for appearing in this second appeal, hence, the learned counsel for the appellants could not turn up when S.A. No.181 of 2003 was called out; which resulted in dismissal of the said S.A. No.181 of 2003 for non-prosecution. It is next submitted that non-prosecution before this court on 08.07.2024 was neither deliberate nor intentional. It is also submitted that the petitioners have very good grounds to agitate in the said S.A. No.181 of 2003 and unless the same is restored to its original file, the petitioners will be highly prejudiced. Hence, it is submitted that the S.A. No.181 of 2003 be restored to its original file. Learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties has not raised any serious objection. Considering the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners, S.A. No.181 of 2003 is directed to be restored to its original file at the same stage at which it was before its dismissal. Registry is directed to list S.A. No.181 of 2003 before the concerned Bench after a week. This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is disposed of accordingly. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Saroj/