Magma Hdi General Insurance Co. Ltd., Kolkata Thr.Its Authorised Signatory vs Savita Nitin Rajurkar and Ors. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Magma Hdi General Insurance Co. Ltd., Kolkata Thr.Its Authorised Signatory vs Savita Nitin Rajurkar and Ors. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

One final opportunity granted: appellant's advocate to supply necessary copies within two weeks (excluding summer vacation); if supplied, notice returnable date extended for ten weeks; on failure, the interim applications to stand dismissed against respondent nos. 1 to 3 without further reference to the Court of Registrar.

Issue for consideration

Whether, given the operation of Chapter VII, Rule 2(iii) of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960 (dismissal for non-prosecution on default of payment of process fees and failure to supply copies) and the expiry of the prescribed time, the interim applications should be dismissed outright or one further opportunity be given to supply copies.

Court's answer

Declining to pass an order of dismissal outright for non-prosecution, the Registrar held it just and proper to give one further opportunity to supply the necessary copies.

Ratio / Principle

Learned advocate for the appellant is directed to supply the necessary copies within two weeks (excluding summer vacation) without fail.

Key takeaways

On failure to supply copies, the interim applications would stand dismissed against respondent nos. 1 to 3 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 (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction), order dated 07/05/2025 in Interim Application No. 6447 of 2024 read with Interim Application No. 6448 of 2024 in First Appeal (ST) No. 14142 of 2022. Invoking Chapter VII, Rule 2(iii) of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960, under which matters defaulting in payment of process fees or supply of copies are to be dismissed for non-prosecution, the Registrar found the prescribed time expired and an earlier two-week window wasted, with no advocate present. Declining outright dismissal, he granted one final opportunity: the appellant's advocate to supply necessary copies within two weeks (excluding summer vacation); on failure, the interim applications to stand dismissed against respondent nos. 1 to 3 without further reference to the Registrar; if supplied, the notice returnable date to be extended for ten weeks.

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

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 6447 OF 2024 A/W INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 6448 OF 2024 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO. 14142 OF 2022

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

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

DATE : 07/05/2025

None Present

The above numbered interim applications are 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 Notices to the respondent nos. 1 to 3.

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.

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

In turn, learned advocate for the appellant is directed to supply necessary copies within two weeks (excluding summer vacation) without fail. On failure, the interim applications would stand dismissed against respondent nos. 1 to 3 without further reference to the Court of Registrar. If copies supplied, notice returnable date be extended for ten weeks

Sd/REGISTRAR (JUDL-II)

sat-R(J-II)-07.05.2025