( 2025:JHHC:38303 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No.30 of 2023 ------ 1. Zafar Naim, son of Naimuddin Haidery, aged about 59 years. 2. Faizal Naim, son of Naimuddin Haidery, aged about 56 years, R/o ME 10, P.O. + P.S.-Mohammad Bin Zayed City, Abudhabi (UAE) and also at the 3rd Street of Hindpiri, P.O. + P.S.-Hindpiri, Dist.-Ranchi. 3. Tarique Naim, son of Naimuddin Haidery, aged about 52 years. 4. Saif Naim, son of Naimuddin Haidery, aged about 47 years. 5. Shamama Rahman, daughter of Naimuddin Haidery, aged about 58 years, W/o Wadudur Rahman, R/o Flat No.110-1B Admongra Mirror Road, P.O. + P.S.-Mirror Road, Abudhabi (UAE). 6. Almas Naim, son of Naimuddin Haidery, aged about 50 years, C/o Dr. Sajid Atique, P.O. Box No.3050, Vill No.5 Areon Garden Alwabh Area, P.O. + P.S.-Alwabh Area Qatar (Doha). All residents of House No.671, 3rd street, Hindpiri, P.O. & P.S.- Hindpiri, District-Ranchi. … Petitioners Versus Sanjay Kumar Mitra, son of Sri Bodh Narayan Mitra, resident of Gandhi Nagar, Dhanbad, P.S.-Dhansar, P.O. & District-Dhanbad. … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. A. Allam, Sr. Advocate : Mr. Faisal Allam, Advocate : Ms. Asfia Sultana, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate ------ Order No:-08 Dated:-19-12-2025 Heard the parties. This civil miscellaneous petition has been filed by the petitioners with the prayer for restoration of S.A. No.213 of 2009 to its original file which stood dismissed for non-compliance of the order dated 29.09.2022. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that S.A. No.213 of 2009 stood dismissed for non-compliance of the order dated 29.09.2022. It is next submitted that due to inadvertent mistake on the part of the Advocate’s Clerk, the learned counsel for the petitioners could not pay Rs.1,000/- to the learned counsel for the opposite party appearing in the record within the stipulated time; which resulted in dismissal of the said S.A. No.213 of 2009 for non-compliance of the order dated 29.09.2022. It is next submitted that non-compliance of the said order dated 29.09.2022 was neither deliberate nor intentional. It is also submitted that the petitioners have very good grounds to agitate in the said S.A. No.213 of 2009 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.213 of 2009 be restored to its original file. Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party has not raised any serious objection. Considering the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the facts and circumstances of this case, S.A. No.213 of 2009 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.213 of 2009 before the concerned Bench after a week. This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is disposed of accordingly. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 19/12/2025 Abhiraj/