Appellate restoration requires a shown mistake in the final order; absence at hearing after repeated adjournments did not justify recall.

An appellate tribunal may decide an appeal on merits when the appellant does not appear, and repeated adjournments at the appellant's request do not by themselves justify restoration. Here, the appeals had been repeatedly adjourned, but no one appeared on the final listing and no further adjournment was sought. The final order had already addressed the issues raised in the memorandum of appeal, and no mistake in that order was shown. On those facts, the restoration applications were held not maintainable and were rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeals, earlier decided on merits in the absence of the applicants, warranted restoration on the ground of any mistake in the final order.

Analysis: The appeals had been listed repeatedly and adjourned at the applicants' request. On the final listing, no one appeared and no adjournment was sought. The earlier final order had decided the appeals on merits after considering the issues raised in the appeal memorandum. In view of the principle that an appellate tribunal is to decide the appeal on merits in the absence of the appellant, and since no mistake in the final order was shown, no basis for restoration was made out.

Conclusion: The restoration applications were not maintainable on the facts and were rejected.

---