Disposed¶11

The National Insurance Co. Ltd. Thr. Tp Hub, v. Tanubai Yallappa Naik and Ors.

Bombay HC25 Jul 2025IA/413/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Registrar's order, Bombay High Court Appellate Side; service of notice on unserved respondent; failure to prosecute; Chapter VII Rule 6(1)(e) Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules 1960; last/final opportunity of two weeks; conditional dismissal of interim applications; First Appeal (Stamp) No. 682 of 2025; I.A. Nos. 413 and 414 of 2025; steps for service of notice; postal stamps and registration charges.

What did the court decide?

One final opportunity of 02 weeks granted to the appellant's advocate to take steps for service of notice upon unserved Respondent No. 4; on failure, the Interim Applications will stand dismissed against unserved Respondent No. 4 without further reference to the Court of Registrar. ¶11

The National Insurance Co. Ltd. Thr. Tp Hub, vs Tanubai Yallappa Naik and Ors. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶11

Issue for consideration

Whether the Interim Applications should be dismissed for failure to prosecute under Chapter VII, Rule 6(1)(e) of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960, given the failure to take steps for service of notice upon unserved Respondent No. 4, or whether a further opportunity should be granted.

¶10

Court's answer

The prescribed time for taking steps for service of notice upon unserved Respondent No. 4 had expired, rendering the matter liable to dismissal for failure to prosecute under Chapter VII, Rule 6(1)(e) of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960.

¶10

Ratio / Principle

Instead of dismissing the Interim Applications outright, the Registrar considered it just and proper to grant one more (final) opportunity: the advocate for the appellant was directed to take steps for service of notice upon unserved Respondent No. 4 within 02 weeks, failing which the Interim Applications would stand dismissed against unserved Respondent No. 4 without further reference to the Court of Registrar.

¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction), Registrar (Judl.-II) Shri S. R. Agrawal, order dated 25/07/2025, in Interim Application Nos. 413 and 414 of 2025 in First Appeal (Stamp) No. 682 of 2025: notice on Respondent No. 4 was returned unserved and, although two weeks had been granted, the appellant's advocate took no steps and supplied no correct address. Invoking Chapter VII, Rule 6(1)(e) of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960 (under which the Registrar shall dismiss a matter for failure to prosecute once the prescribed time for taking steps lapses), the Registrar, instead of dismissing the Interim Applications outright, granted one final opportunity of two weeks to take steps for service of notice upon unserved Respondent No. 4, directing that on failure the Interim Applications would stand dismissed against the unserved Respondent No. 4 without further reference to the Court of Registrar.

¶1

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

¶2

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 413 OF 2025 ALONGWITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 414 OF 2025 IN FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 682 OF 2025

¶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 : 25/07/2025

¶6

None Present

¶7

The notice of respondent No. 4 is returned unserved. Therefore, the above numbered Interim Applications are listed on the board of registrar for second time for taking steps for service of notice upon unserved respondent No. 4. However, learned advocate for applicant has neither taken any steps nor supplied proper and correct address of respondent No. 4.

¶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

¶9

been supplied within the prescribed time, and the Registrar shall dismiss the matter for failure to prosecute.:

¶10

As such, the prescribed time to take steps for service of notice upon unserved respondent No. 4 as provided under Rule 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 more opportunity to take steps for service of notice upon unserved respondent No. 4.

¶11

In turn, learned advocate for the appellant is directed to take appropriate steps for service of notice upon unserved respondent No. 4 within 02 weeks without fail. On failure, Interim Applications would stand dismissed against unserved respondent No. 4 without further reference to the Court of Registrar.

¶12

Sd/-

¶13

sat-R(J-II)-25.07.2025

The National Insurance Co. Ltd. Thr. Tp Hub, v. Tanubai Yallappa Naik and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The National Insurance Co. Ltd. Thr. Tp Hub, v. Tanubai Yallappa Naik 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

Sou. Savita Balaram Patil and Anr. vs Khashibai K.Jadhav-Dec.Thr. Lrs. Sitaram Maruti Jadhav 1.1 Shankar Sitaram Jadhav and Ors.

Mr. Pandurang S/O Raghunath Patil vs Dedicated Freight Corridor Corporation of India Ltd.,Mumbai Thr. Chief General Manager / North

Shabnam Mubarak Bagwan and Ors. vs Javir Gulamrasul Shaikh and Ors.

Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Ganesh Popat Shinde and Ors.

Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Ganesh Popat Shinde and Ors.

Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Alka Sandip Barwade and Ors.