[2026:RJ-JP:4504] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Restoration Application No. 9/2020 In S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.422/2005 1. Jagdish S/o Shri Balva, R/o Naya Joda (Dhundhta Ki Dhani) Since Deceased. 2. Shanti Devi W/o Late Shri Jagdish Meena, R/o Naya Joda (Dhundhta Ki Dhani), Tan Bansur, District Alwar, Rajasthan. 3. Anita Devi Widow Of Ashok Kumar Meena, R/o Badh Dhundhta Ki Dhani Meenan, Tan Bansur, District Alwar, Rajasthan. ----Applicants/Claimants Versus 1. Narain S/o Shri Munna Ram, R/o Punaira Police Station Jawala, Ajmer. (Driver Tractor No. Rj-01-R-1929). 2. Laxman Singh S/o Shri Jawan Singh, R/o Klinjar, Post Rajiyawas, Tehsil Beawar, District Ajmer. (Owner Tractor Ford No. Rj-01-R-1929). 3. Sohan Singh S/o Shri Jawan Singh, R/o Klinjar, Post Rajiyawas, Tehsil Beawar, District Ajmer. (Owner Tractor Ford No. Rj-01-R-1929). 4. United India Insurance Company Ltd., Through Its Zonal Manager, Alwar, Ashok Circle, Alwar. (Insurer Of Tractor No. Rj-01-R-1929). 5. Manoj Parwani S/o Shri Bhagi Ram, R/o S.b-51, Ganesh Marg, Bapu Nagar, Jaipur. (Owner Vehicle Jeep No. Rj-14- 2C-1403). 6. The New India Insurance Company Ltd., Through Its Branch Manager, Purana Power House, Alwar. (Insurer Of Jeep No. Rj-14-2C-1403). ----Respondents/Non applicants For Applicants(s) : Mr. Jai Kishan Yogi, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tripurari Sharma, Adv. Mr. Bhupendra Sharma, Adv. [2026:RJ-JP:4504] (2 of 4) [CRES-9/2020] HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR Order 30/01/2026 1. The matter comes up on an application (I.A No.107/2020) preferred by the applicants-claimants filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay of 1591 days in filing the present restoration application to restore S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.422/2005, which was dismissed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 23.04.2015 for want of prosecution as the defects were not removed despite several opportunities. 2. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that the applicants filed S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.422/2005 on 01.02.2005, which was passed on 07.02.2005 without any defect being pointed out by the office and thus, the same was listed before the Court for admission on 14.02.2005. Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that about 465 civil miscellaneous appeals were pending in the Court for last more than 10 years, in the category of defects, which were not removed even after several opportuni- ties granted to the applicants. Therefore, all those appeals were ordered to be listed before the Court as a bunch in defect category; however, the appeal i.e. S.B. CMA No.422/2005 filed by the applicants was inadvertently tagged with the aforesaid bunch. Thereafter, the Coordinate Bench of this Court dismissed all these appeals, including the appeal of the present applicants, for want of prosecution as the applicants, therein, failed to remove the defects, whereas, no defect was there in the present appeal. It is further submitted that the present restoration application has [2026:RJ-JP:4504] (3 of 4) [CRES-9/2020] been filed with a delay of 1591 days due to the reasons; firstly, the present applicants Nos.2 and 3 are widow ladies and both of them reside in a remote village of District Alwar and were unable to contact their counsel. Secondly, the name of the counsel for the applicants was not reflected in the cause list. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants contends that there was no defect in the appeal filed by the applicants, however, the said appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution the same was wrongly tagged in bunch of appeals, wherein the defects were not cured despite several opportunities; nevertheless the appeal of the applicants was passed on 07.02.2005 itself and the same was listed before the Court. Learned counsel the applicants further prays that the delay in filing the present restoration application be condoned and the appeal be restored to its original number. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent- Insurance Company opposes the prayer made by learned counsel on behalf of the applicants and submits that the reason submitted by the applicants for not filing the restoration application within stipulated time is self contradictory on the part of applicants as on the one hand, they stated that the name of their counsel was not shown in the cause list and as such their counsel did not appear in the Court and their appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution, whereas on the other hand they stated that they are widow ladies residing in a remote area, thereafter they failed to contact their counsel as a result of which the restoration application has been filed with delay. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. [2026:RJ-JP:4504] (4 of 4) [CRES-9/2020] 6. Admittedly, there was no defect in the appeal filed by the applicants and inadvertently, the said appeal was wrongly tagged with the bunch of 465 appeals, wherein the defects were not cured despite several opportunities, therefore, all those appeals were dismissed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide common order dated 23.04.2015 for want of prosecution. 7. For the reasons mentioned in the application as well as in the interest of justice, the delay of 1591 days in filing the present restoration application is condoned. Office is directed to restore S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.422/2005 to its original number. 8. It is made clear that the applicants shall not be entitled to any interest on the award if enhanced by the Court from the date of dismissal of the appeal till the date of filing of the restoration application. 9. Office to proceed. (ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J TANISHA /67