C.P.No.D-736 of 2006

For orders on CMA-5041/2015

18.08.2015

Neither petitioner nor his counsel is in attendance, no intimation is received. Through listed application it appears that the applicant has sought restoration of an application which was earlier filed by the petitioner seeking restoration of the petition, which was dismissed for non-prosecution. Such application was dismissed vide order dated 05.11.2014 in the following terms:

“The instant petition was dismissed on account of non-prosecution on 26.10.2010 thereafter as late as on 29.05.2013 an application for restoration was filed without there being any application for condoning the delay. Mr. Suhail Ahmed Khoso advocate has appeared on behalf of the petitioner and submitted that since the petitioner was unaware of the dismissal hence the restoration has been filed.

It is noted that an application for restoration has been filed without filing any application for condoning the delay, hence, the said application for restoration is not maintainable and is accordingly dismissed.”

Accordingly, the listed application being misconceived in facts and law is dismissed for non-prosecution.

JUDGE

JUDGE

N.M.