Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. Mumbai vs Mohammed Kasam Shaikh and Ors. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. Mumbai vs Mohammed Kasam Shaikh and Ors. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

One further opportunity of two weeks granted to the learned advocate for the applicant to supply the necessary copies; 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, notices to respondent Nos. 1 to 3 returnable by ten weeks.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Interim Applications ought to be dismissed for non-prosecution for failure to supply copies within the prescribed time under the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960.

Court's answer

Although the prescribed time to supply copies had expired and the two weeks already granted proved fruitless, the Registrar considered it just and proper to grant one more opportunity to supply the necessary copies rather than dismiss the Interim Applications outright.

Ratio / Principle

The learned advocate for the applicant was directed to supply the necessary copies within two weeks 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 were supplied, notices were to issue to respondent Nos. 1 to 3, returnable by ten weeks.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Registrar (Judl-II) Shri S.R. Agrawal, order dated 23/09/2025 in Interim Application Nos. 6848 and 6849 of 2025 in First Appeal (Stamp) No. 2887 of 2025: The Interim Applications, listed for the second time on the Board of Registrar for supplying copies, lay unprosecuted — despite two weeks already granted, the Advocate for the Applicant had not supplied copies for issuing notices to respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Invoking Chapter VII, Rule 2 (iii) of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960 (under which the Registrar shall dismiss matters where process fees are unpaid and/or copies unsupplied within the prescribed time), the Registrar nonetheless declined to dismiss outright and granted one final opportunity of two weeks to supply the necessary copies; on failure, the Interim Applications would stand dismissed against respondent Nos. 1 to 3 without further reference to the Court of Registrar; if copies were supplied, notices to respondent Nos. 1 to 3 were to issue, returnable by ten weeks.

12

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. 12 THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 6848 OF 2025 ALONGWITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 6849 OF 2025 IN FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 2887 OF 2025

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 : 23/09/2025

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 Applicant has not supplied copies for issuing Notices to 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 more opportunity to supply the necessary copies.

In turn, the learned advocate for the applicant is directed to supply necessary copies within 02 weeks 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, issue notices to respondent Nos. 1 to 3, returnable by ten weeks.

Sd/-

sat-R(J-II)-23.09.2025