Disposed

Pruthviraj @ Rajaram Dnyanoba Bhokare and Anr. v. the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Satara

Bombay HC19 Jun 2024FA/122/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The appeal was listed for service of notice on respondent no. 2, which returned unserved. Despite previous orders, no steps were taken. The court granted one final opportunity of three weeks to serve notice, failing which the appeal would stand dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Three weeks time granted to take steps for service of notice upon unserved respondent no. 2; appeal to stand dismissed on failure.

Pruthviraj @ Rajaram Dnyanoba Bhokare and Anr. vs… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶2

FIRST APPEAL NO. 122 OF 2024

¶3

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court’s or Judge’s order appearance, Court’s Orders or directions and Registrar’s orders

¶4

CORAM : SHRI S. R. AGRAWAL REGISTRAR (JUDL -II)

¶5

DATE : 29/07/2024

¶6

none present

¶7

The notice issued to respondent no. 2 is returned unserved. Therefore, the above numbered First Appeal is listed on the board of registrar for second time for taking steps for service of notices upon unserved respondent no. 2. However, learned advocate for appellant has neither taken any steps nor supplied proper and correct address of respondent no. 2.

¶8

In view of provisions under Chapter VII, Rule 6 (1) (e) of the Bombay High Court, Appellate Side Rules, 1960, Immediately after the expiry of the period prescribed under the foregoing sub-rule of this rule for taking the requisite steps for the issue of fresh notice or or supplying postal stamps to cover the postal and registration charges, the office shall place before the Registrar all such matters in which steps have not been taken for the issue of fresh notices or the postal stamps to cover the postal and registration charges have not been supplied within the prescribed time, and the Registrar shall dismiss the matter

¶9

for failure to prosecute.:

¶10

As such, the prescribed time to take steps for service of notice upon unserved respondent no. 2 as provided under Rule 1960 has been expired. 03 weeks time was granted, but all in vain. The matter is lying ideally without any progress due to not taken any steps. However, instead of passing order of dismissal outrightly, it would be just and proper to give one opportunity to take steps for service of notice upon unserved respondent no. 2.

¶11

In turn, three weeks time is granted with directions to take appropriate steps for service of notice upon unserved respondent no. 2 without fail. On failure, First Appeal would stand dismissed against unserved respondent no. 2 without further reference to the Court of Registrar.

¶12

Sd/REGISTRAR (JUDL-II)

¶13

sat-R(J-II)-29.07.2024

Pruthviraj @ Rajaram Dnyanoba Bhokare and Anr. v. the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Satara

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pruthviraj @ Rajaram Dnyanoba Bhokare and Anr. v. the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Satara

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Beena Suresh Marothiya and Anr. vs Sanjay Avadhabihari Singh and Ors.

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Mr. Mukesh Gulab Samtani and Anr.

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Sharada Subhash Bhakare and Ors.

Adil@Shalu Ibrar Siddhiqui vs State of Maharashtra

Vijaylaxmi Shivprasad Upadhyay vs State of Maharashtra

Hanumant Mahadu Darode vs Union Territory of Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Ors.