[2025:RJ-JP:820] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Restoration Application No. 589/2024 in S.B. Civil Restoration No. 578/2018 in S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1316/2017 M/s Internal Vigil Security (Registered) Jaipur, Through Proprietor Retired Lt. Col. Jogendra Singh Lamba S/o Shri Hardwarilal Aged 76 Years R/o 75 Anand Nagar Sirsi, Road, Jaipur (Raj) ----Petitioner Versus 1. Divisional Engineer Administration Office Of General Manager, Door Sanchar, District Sikar, Tehsil And District Sikar. 2. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Through General Manager, Basant Vihar, Sikar, Tehsil And District Sikar, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Om Prakash Sheoran For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 06/01/2025 1. Instant restoration application is preferred to restore restoration application no. 578/2018 in S.B. CMA no. 1316/2017, dismissed for non-prosecution on 25.08.2023. 2. Office has pointed out a delay of 85 days in preferring restoration application. 3. An application under Section 5 of Limitation Act is filed for condoning the delay of 85 days and considering the grounds as [2025:RJ-JP:820] (2 of 3) [CRES-589/2024] mentioned in the application, it is appropriate to allow condonation of delay application, therefore, the application is allowed and delay is condoned. 4. Misc. application stands disposed of. 5. Heard on merits of restoration application. 6. To challenge impugned judgment dated 16.09.2016 in civil misc. case no. 46/2013 passed by learned Additional District Judge no.1, Sikar under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, a S.B. CMA was preferred by appellant/applicant. 7. When this matter was listed on 18.08.2017 no one was present on behalf of appellant. 8. On 27.10.2017 the Court has directed issuance of notice and after service of notice the matter was listed on 03.07.2018. When this matter was listed and taken up on 30.07.2018 no one was present on behalf of appellant and civil misc. appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution. 9. The restoration application no. 578/2018 was preferred and this matter was taken up on 20.02.2023 and no one was present for appellant and matter was directed to be listed after three weeks. Again on 25.08.2023 no one was present on behalf of appellant/ applicant and ultimately the restoration application was dismissed. 10. Aforesaid proceeding indicate that on multiple occasions the counsel for appellant/applicant remained absent and ultimately the matter was dismissed. 11. There is no sufficient ground for restoration of restoration application. The original CMA was dismissed for non-prosecution and restoration application was dismissed for non-prosecution. It [2025:RJ-JP:820] (3 of 3) [CRES-589/2024] indicates that the matter was not pursued before the Court, therefore, the Court cannot help out a litigant who remained negligent himself. 12. In view of aforesaid, there is no ground to restore restoration application no. 578/2018. 13. Hence, the restoration application sans merit and is hereby dismissed. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J CHETNA BEHRANI /14