[2026:RJ-JP:29156-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil First Appeal No. 1336/2025 CNR: RJHC020631562025 | URN: CFA / 2184U / 2025 Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank, herein after called as "RMGB", Head Office At Tulsi Tower, 9Th B Road, Sardarpura, Jodhpur, Rajasthan-342003, Having Its Branch Office At Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank, Bhankrota, Jaipur, Through Its Authorized Officer/regional Manager Mr. Neeraj Paliwal as presently Regional Manager Mr. Upendra Shekhawat. As of now-Rajasthan Gramin Bank, Head Office at Jaipur, Camp at Tulsi Tower, 9th B Road, Sardarpura, Jodhpur, Rajasthan 342003, having its branch office at Rajasthan Gramin Bank, Bhankrota, Jaipur, through its Branch Manager/officer in charge. ----Appellant Versus M/s Roop Textiles, (Through Its Proprietor Mr. Raghuveer Singh) S/o Mr. Ganpat Singh, Having Its Firm Address At P. No. 21, Devi Nagar Vistar Ke Pass, Kalwar Road, Jaipur (Raj.) 302012, Also At 177, Rajputo Ka Bass Village, Bhawla, Nagaur, (Raj.) -341024, Also At 15, Shri Rampura Colony, Opp. Governor House, Civil Lines, Shyam Nagar, Jaipur, (Raj.) 302019. ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Ms. Sumati Bishnoi, Adv. with Mr. Rakesh Sharma, Adv. & Mr. Aditya Sharma, Adv. for Mr. Harish Chandra Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR Order 28/07/2026 1. The present appeal has been filed challenging the order dated 29.07.2024 passed by the learned Commercial Court no. 1, Jaipur Metropolitan-II, whereby the restoration application filed by the [2026:RJ-JP:29156-DB] (2 of 3) [CFA-1336/2025] appellant under Order IX Rule 9 CPC was initially allowed subject to cost of Rs. 5,000/-, but subsequently the restoration proceedings were dismissed in default due to non-deposit of the cost of Rs 5,000 amount vide order dated 27.09.2024. 2. At the outset, having heard learned counsel for the appellant, we do not deem it necessary to issue notice to the respondents, in view of the nature of order which we propose to pass, as no prejudice would be caused to the respondents on the merits of the case which is to be adjudicated. 3. All that the appellant herein is seeking is the restoration of the civil suit, which was dismissed on the ground of non-payment of Rs. 5,000/-, which was imposed as costs as a pre-condition to restore the civil suit. 4. Having gone through the appeal, it so transpires that the non-appearance of the Appellant's counsel was occasioned by severe medical exigencies, as the counsel suffered a brain stroke and remained in an unconscious condition. Consequently, although the Learned Commercial Court directed the Appellant to deposit the costs within 15 working days from the date of the order, i.e., 29.07.2024, the Appellant was unable to comply with the said direction within the stipulated period due to the counsel's sudden and prolonged medical incapacity. 5. Accordingly, we are of the view that, for the fault of the learned counsel, a litigant cannot be made to suffer irreversible consequences, as the delay in depositing the costs occurred due to bona fide reasons. 6. As an upshot, the appeal is allowed, the impugned orders dated 29.07.2024 and 27.09.2024 are set aside. The civil suit is [2026:RJ-JP:29156-DB] (3 of 3) [CFA-1336/2025] restored to its original number and learned Commercial Court shall proceed further from the same status in accordance with law. 7. All pending applications also stand disposed of. (ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J (ARUN MONGA),J 5/Mohita/Parshant