Disposed¶11

Mr. Bhimrao Ramchandra Lad and Anr. v. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Anr.

Bombay HC25 Jun 2024FA/822/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

First Appeal No. 822 of 2024; High Court of Judicature at Bombay; Registrar (Judl-II) S. R. Agrawal; order dated 10/07/2024; dismissal for non-prosecution; failure to supply copies; default in payment of process fees; Chapter VII Rule 2(iii) Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules 1960; last opportunity of three weeks; conditional dismissal against respondent No. 2; notice returnable date extended ten weeks; advocates Sahil Pandire and Bhushan Walimbe for Appellant.

What did the court decide?

One final opportunity of three weeks granted to the Appellant to supply necessary copies without fail; on failure the First Appeal to stand dismissed against respondent No. 2 without further reference to the Court of Registrar; if copies supplied, notice returnable date to be extended for ten weeks. ¶11

Mr. Bhimrao Ramchandra Lad and Anr. vs National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Anr. — Bombay HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶11

Issue for consideration

Whether the First Appeal should be dismissed for non-prosecution on account of default in payment of process fees and/or failure to supply copies within the prescribed time.

¶8

Court's answer

The prescribed time to supply copies under the 1960 Rules had expired; two weeks' time earlier granted proved unavailing and the matter lay without progress as the Appellant's Advocate took no steps.

¶9

Ratio / Principle

Instead of passing an order of dismissal outright, it would be just and proper to give one more opportunity to supply the necessary copies.

¶10

Key takeaways

Three weeks' time granted with directions to supply necessary copies without fail; on failure, the First Appeal would stand dismissed against respondent No. 2 without further reference to the Court of Registrar.ratio¶11
If copies are supplied, the notice returnable date is to be extended for ten weeks.ratio¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Registrar (Judl-II), High Court of Judicature at Bombay — First Appeal No. 822 of 2024, order dated 10/07/2024. The appeal, listed a second time before the Registrar for supply of copies, showed default despite two weeks' time earlier granted. Invoking Chapter VII, Rule 2(iii) of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960 (dismissal for non-prosecution on default of process fees and/or failure to supply copies), the Registrar declined to dismiss outrightly and granted one final opportunity of three weeks to supply the necessary copies, directing that on failure the First Appeal would stand dismissed against respondent No. 2 without further reference to the Court of Registrar; if copies were supplied, the notice returnable date was to be extended for ten weeks.

¶1

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

¶2

FIRST APPEAL NO. 822 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 : 10/07/2024

¶6

Adv. Sahil Pandire i/by Adv. Bhushan Walimbe present for the Appellant

¶7

The above numbered First Appeal is listed for second time on the Board of Registrar for supplying copies. Already two weeks time was granted. However, despite of granting two weeks time, the Advocate for the Appellant has not supplied copies for issuing Notice to respondent No. 2.

¶8

In view of provisions under Chapter VII, Rule 2 (iii) of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960 matters to be dismissed for non-prosecution in case of default of payment of process fess and failure to supply copies – Immediately after the expiry of the time prescribed in the foregoing sub-rules of this rule for the supply of copies, the Office shall place before the Registrar all such matters in which the process fees have not been paid and/or the copies have not been supplied within the prescribed time, and the Registrar shall dismiss all such matters for failure to prosecute.

¶9

As such, the prescribed time to supply copies, as provided under Rules,1960 has been expired. 02 weeks time was granted, but all in vain. The matter is lying ideally without any progress as learned Advocate

¶10

for the Appellant has not taken any steps. However, instead of passing order of dismissal outrightly, it would be just and proper to give one more opportunity to supply the necessary copies.

¶11

In turn, three weeks time is granted with directions to supply necessary copies without fail. On failure, the First Appeal would stand dismissed against respondent No. 2 without further reference to the Court of Registrar. If copies supplied, notice returnable date be extended for ten weeks

¶12

Sd/REGISTRAR (JUDL-II)

¶13

sat-R(J-II)-10.07.2024

Mr. Bhimrao Ramchandra Lad and Anr. v. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Bhimrao Ramchandra Lad and Anr. v. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Swapnil Baban Sawant vs State of Maharashtra

Abdul Rahman Ansari Authorized Representative of Dettiners Private Limited vs State of Maharashtra

Jayshree Rajesh Kanabar vs the State of Maharashtra

Smt. Annapurna Ananda Muthane and Ors. vs Ajit Dnyanoba Shinde and Ors.

Mr. Bhimrao Ramchandra Lad and Anr. vs National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Anr.

Shri. Suresh Ambadas Pawar vs Shri. Laxman Narayan Patole and Anr.