JUDGMENT - KHANDEPARKAR R.M.S., J.:---Heard the Advocates for the parties. Perused the record.

In the facts and circumstances of the case both the applications being required to be heard together, were heard accordingly and are being disposed of by this common order.

2. Rule. By consent, the rule made returnable forthwith.

3. Civil Application No. 4437 of 2002 is for condonation of delay in filing Civil Application No. 1932 of 2002 and later application i.e. Civil Application No. 1932 of 2002 is for restoration of First Appeal No. 891 of 1995, which was dismissed on 6th October, 2001 as well as for condonation of delay in filing the certified copy of the decree in the said appeal. Civil Application No. 4437 of 2002 is hereinafter referred to as the 'application for condonation of delay' and the Civil Application No. 1932 of 2002 is hereinafter referred to as the 'application for restoration'.

4. In the proceedings in application for condonation of delay it is the case of the petitioners that after the dismissal of the appeal on 6th October, 2001 the appellants preferred Letters Patent Appeal No. 60 of 2001 which was disposed of on 11-3-2002 and thereafter the application for restorati

Click Here to Read the rest of this document