The High Court dismissed an execution application filed in 2017 for non-prosecution lasting over six years under Rule 329 of the Bombay High Court Rules, 1980.
The execution application is dismissed; interim proceedings stand disposed of; respondents granted liberty to lift attachment.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Digitally signed by LAXMIKANT LAXMIKANT GOPAL GOPAL CHANDAN CHANDAN Date: 2023.07.26 14:11:34 +0530
1 (14) EXA-1007.17.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 1007 OF 2017
M/s. Cholamandalam Investment &
Finance Co. Ltd. ….. Claimant
Vs.
Ganesh Prabhakar Narkar and ors. ….. Respondents.
None for the Claimant.
P.C. :
Claimant.
“ R.329. Non-prosecution of application for execution .---- When a party does not proceed with the application for execution for a period of twelve months from the date of the filing of application, the Prothonotary and Senior Master shall place the application before the Judge in Chambers for dismissal for want
1 of 3
LGC
2 (14) EXA-1007.17.doc
of prosecution. The Judge may pass such orders thereon as he may think fit.”
has not been prosecuted for well over a period of 12 months, in fact for over 6 years from the date of filing.
2 of 3
LGC
3 (14) EXA-1007.17.doc
warrants of attachment issued in this matter, the judgment debtors are granted liberty to take necessary steps as are available in law for lifting the attachment.
(ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.)
3 of 3
LGC
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an execution application unprosecuted for over six years should be dismissed under the court rules.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M/s. Cholamandalam Investment & Finance Co. Ltd.
Ganesh Prabhakar Narkar
ARIF S. DOCTOR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
