Bombay High Court

SHRI. MICHAEL THOMAS GRACIOUSversusSHRI. ASHISH ASHOK SUTAR

Decided: 17 June 2026
Disposal: Dismissed
Bench: JITENDRA SHANTILAL JAIN

Holding

The appeal was dismissed due to the appellant's non‑compliance and lack of instructions, and the civil applications were disposed of.

Summary

The appellant, Michael Thomas Gracious, was ordered on 1 July 2024 to deposit 75% of a sum, but failed to comply despite repeated follow‑up by counsel. The appellant did not provide any instructions to his counsel, indicating a lack of interest in pursuing the appeal. The court observed this inactivity and consequently dismissed the appeal. As a result, the two accompanying civil applications were also deemed not to survive and were disposed of. The judgment was delivered by Justice Jitendra Jain on 17 June 2026.

Issues considered

Whether the appeal can proceed when the appellant fails to comply with a court order and does not give instructions to counsel
Whether the pending civil applications should survive after dismissal of the appeal

Subjects

appeal dismissal
non‑compliance with court order
civil procedure
order enforcement
application disposal

Judgment

  2026:BHC-AS:24512
                             Sayyed                                                     17-FA(ST).7006.2019.doc


                                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                                  CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                               FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.7006 OF 2019
                                                              WITH
                                               CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1548 OF 2019
                                                              WITH
                                               CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1549 OF 2019

                             Michael Thomas Gracious                ...Appellant/Applicant
                                   Versus
                             Ashish Ashok Sutar                     ...Respondent
                                   _____________________________________________________
                             Mr. P. B. Gole i/by Mr. P. M. Patil for the Appellant/Applicant.
                             None for the Respondent.
                                    _____________________________________________________

                                                            CORAM :         JITENDRA JAIN, J.
                                                            DATE        :   17 JUNE 2026
                             P.C.:

                             1.        Mr. Gole, learned counsel for the appellant-applicant states
                             that the order dated 1 July 2024 to deposit 75% has not been complied
                             by the appellant inspite of the advocate constantly following up with the
                             appellant.


                             2.        It seems that the appellant may not be interested in pursuing
                             the present appeal since he is not giving instructions to the appellant.
                             Therefore, appeal is dismissed. Consequently, civil applications do not
                             survive and are disposed of accordingly.


                                                                              [ JITENDRA JAIN, J. ]




Signed by: Sayyed Saeed Ali
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 18/06/2026 11:56:36                                      1 of 1

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…