Disposed¶8

Shri. Rajendra Baban Pangare v. Shri Sagar Balu Gole and Ors.

Bombay HC29 Apr 2025CRA/572/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Registrar's procedural order; failure to prosecute; steps for issuance of fresh notice to unserved respondents; supply of postal stamps and registration charges; Chapter VII Rule 6(1)(e) and Rule 6(1)-(2), Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960; conditional/automatic dismissal on default; last opportunity; Civil Revision Application No. 572 of 2024; Bombay High Court Civil Appellate Jurisdiction; order dated 10 June 2025; Registrar (Judl.-II) S.R. Agrawal.

What did the court decide?

Final opportunity of two weeks to the Applicant to take steps against unserved Respondent Nos. 3, 7, 8, 11 and 12; on failure, the Civil Revision Application to stand dismissed against those respondents without further reference to the court of the Registrar. ¶8

Shri. Rajendra Baban Pangare vs Shri Sagar Balu Gole and Ors. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶8

Issue for consideration

Whether the Civil Revision Application is liable to be dismissed for failure to prosecute under Chapter VII Rule 6(1)(e) of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960, on account of steps not having been taken against unserved Respondent Nos. 3, 7, 8, 11 and 12.

¶5

Court's answer

The prescribed time under the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960 for taking steps against unserved Respondent Nos. 3, 7, 8, 11 and 12 had expired and the matter lay without progress despite two weeks' time already granted.

¶6

Ratio / Principle

Rather than passing an order of dismissal outright for failure to prosecute, the Registrar considered it just and proper to grant one further opportunity to take steps against unserved Respondent Nos. 3, 7, 8, 11 and 12.

¶6

Key takeaways

Two weeks' final time was granted with directions to take steps against unserved Respondent Nos. 3, 7, 8, 11 and 12 without fail; on failure, the Civil Revision Application would stand dismissed against those respondents without further reference to the court of the Registrar.ratio¶8

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil Revision Application No. 572 of 2024 (High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Civil Appellate Jurisdiction) — Order dated 10 June 2025 by S.R. Agrawal, Registrar (Judl.-II): Despite two weeks' time already granted, the Applicant took no steps against unserved Respondent Nos. 3, 7, 8, 11 and 12, attracting Chapter VII Rule 6(1)(e) of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960, under which matters in which steps have not been taken within the prescribed time are placed before the Registrar, who shall dismiss the matter for failure to prosecute. Declining to dismiss outrightly, the Registrar granted one final opportunity of two weeks to take steps against the unserved respondents, directing that on default the Civil Revision Application shall stand dismissed against Respondent Nos. 3, 7, 8, 11 and 12 without further reference to the court of the Registrar.

¶1

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.572 OF 2024

¶4

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders	Court’s or Judge’s orders
CORAM :S.R. AGRAWAL REGISTRAR (JUDL.-II) DATE : 10^thJune, 2025
Advocate Prasad Ganu Keluskar for Applicant present.
The above numbered Civil Revision
Application is listed on board of Registrar for second time. Already two weeks time has
been granted, however, despite granting
two weeks time, Advocate for the Applicant
hasnot taken any steps against unserved Respondent Nos.3, 7, 8, 11 & 12 .
Here reference to Chapter VII Rule 6
Sub rule 1 and 2 of the Bombay High Court,
Appellate Side Rules, 1960 (for short
“Rules”) may be conveniently made. It
states about Processes, Process fees,
Printing Charges, Security for costs and
other procedure after admission etc.

¶5

In view of provisions under Chapter VII Rule 6(1) (e), immediately after the expiry of the period prescribed under the forgoing sub-rule of this rule for taking the requisite steps for the issue of fresh notice or for 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 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 for failure to prosecute.

¶6

As such, the prescribed time to take steps against unserved Respondent Nos.3, 7, 8, 11 & 12 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 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 against unserved Respondent Nos.3, 7, 8, 11 & 12.

¶7

In turn, 02 (two) weeks time is granted with directions to take steps against

¶8

unserved Respondent Nos.3, 7, 8, 11 & 12 without fail. On failure, Civil Revision Application would stand dismissed against unserved Respondent Nos.3, 7, 8, 11 & 12 without further reference to the court of Registrar. sd/Registrar (Judl. - II) dsm

Shri. Rajendra Baban Pangare v. Shri Sagar Balu Gole and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri. Rajendra Baban Pangare v. Shri Sagar Balu Gole and Ors.

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

Bhimrao Ramchandra Lad vs Sou. Rajmati Dinkar Patil and Ors.

Vilas Waikar and Others vs Maharashtra Housing and Area Developement Authorit

Vishwabhushan Shrikant Alias Annaso Patil vs Baburao Balwant Parmale Since Deceased through Legal Heirs and Anr.

Ubs Business Solutions (India) Private Limited vs Nisheet Singh

Dynamic Events vs Institute for Transport and Development Policy

Fakruddin S. Jahagirdar(Deceased) Thr. Lrs. Kausar P.Jahagirdar and Others vs M/S. Bora-Galande Associates and Others