[2025:RJ-JP:1340] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1871/2024 Taj Paper Udhyog, Through Its Proprietor Abdul Jbbar S/o Shi Ajimulla Taj, R/o Dhalasiya Ki Dhani, Jain Nasiyan Road, Near Jain Hostel, Sanganer Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Rajasthan State, Through P.p. 2. Jaipur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Vidhyut Bhawan, Near Vidhansabha, Jaipur Through Chief Managing Director (C.m.d.) 3. Assistant Engineer (F-3), Jaipur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Sanganer, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jai Kishan Singh, Adv. Mr. Ashish Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jaivardhan Singh, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Order 09/01/2025 This Civil Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner- plaintiff (for short 'the plaintiff') against the order dated 09.01.2024 passed by Additional District Judge No.10, Jaipur Metropolitan (Headquarter Sanganer) in C.M.A. No.96/2023, whereby appeal filed by the plaintiff has been dismissed and the order dated 04.11.2023 passed by the trial court dismissed the restoration application has been affirmed. Learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that plaintiff filed a suit against the respondents-defendants (for short 'the defendants'). That suit was dismissed in default by the trial court [2025:RJ-JP:1340] (2 of 3) [CW-1871/2024] on 12.09.2023. Plaintiff filed a restoration application before the trial court but trial court vide order dated 04.11.2023 dismissed the application filed by the plaintiff. Learned counsel for the plaintiff also submits that plaintiff filed an appeal against the order of the trial court but appellate court dismissed the appeal filed by the plaintiff. Learned counsel for the plaintiff also submits that due to unavoidable reason, petitioner could not attend the trial court. Learned Appellate Court wrongly came to the conclusion that plaintiff had only filed the restoration application for restoration of temporary injunction and not for the suit. Learned counsel for the plaintiff also submits that the order of the trial court clearly reveals that plaintiff had filed an application for restoring the suit as well as temporary injunction application. So, order of the trial court as well as appellate court be set aside and suit filed by the plaintiff be restored. Learned counsel for the defendants has opposed the same. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the plaintiff as well as learned counsel for the defendants. It is an admitted position that due to unavoidable reason, petitioner could not attend the trial court and trial court dismissed the suit filed by the plaintiff in default. Cause shown by the plaintiff for his non-appearance seems to be bona-fide. So, I deem it fit to allow the petition filed by the plaintiff. The Civil Writ Petition filed by the plaintiff is allowed. The orders dated 12.09.2023 and 04.11.2023 passed by the trial court as well as order dated 09.01.2024 passed by the appellate court [2025:RJ-JP:1340] (3 of 3) [CW-1871/2024] are set aside and trial court is directed to restore the suit as well as temporary injunction application filed by the plaintiff at their original number. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of. (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Jatin /78