Bombay High Court
THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.versusSMT.LAJWANTI SEVARAM WADHAWANI and ORS.
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The appeal is dismissed for non‑prosecution due to the appellant's failure to appear.
Summary
The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. filed an appeal (First Appeal No. 1063 of 2002) challenging a judgment dated 1 November 2001 that awarded Rs. 79,000 to the mother of a deceased accident victim. The appeal was listed for disposal on 24 September 2026. At the hearing, neither the appellant nor the appellant's counsel appeared, either in person or via video conference. Respondent No. 2 and 3, represented by Advocate Aryan Sawant, sought dismissal of the appeal on the ground of the appellant's absence. The Court, noting the lack of prosecution by the appellant, dismissed the appeal for non‑prosecution.
Issues considered
- Whether an appeal may be dismissed for non‑prosecution when the appellant and its counsel are absent from the hearing.
Subjects
- appeal
- non-prosecution
- dismissal
- civil procedure
- high court
Judgment
907 - FA - 1063 - 2002.docx
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
VAIBHAV
RAMESH
JADHAV
Digitally signed by
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1063 OF 2002
VAIBHAV RAMESH
JADHAV
Date: 2026.09.24
17:52:46 +0530
The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. … Appellant
V/s.
Lajwanti Sevaram Wadhawani & Ors. … Respondents
None for the Appellant.
Mr. Aryan Sawant i/by Mr. Tejpal Ingale for Respondent
Nos.2 and 3.
CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
DATED : SEPTEMBER 24, 2026
P.C.:
1. On 10th September 2026, the following order was passed:
“1. This Appeal is of the year 2002.
2. Mr. Aryan Sawant, learned Advocate, appears for Respondent Nos. 2
and 3. He states that he would issue a Advocate’s Notice to the Oriental
Insurance Company notifying them of the next date fixed in this Appeal.
3. List this Appeal on 24.09.2026, under the caption “For Disposal”, on
the Supplementary Board.”
2. Today, when this Appeal was called out the names of the
Appellant/Advocate for the Appellant were called out by the Court
Sheristedar. Neither the Appellant nor the Advocate for the Appellant
are present physically or through V.C. mode in Court.
3. Mr. Aryan Sawant, learned Advocate, appears for Respondent
VRJ 1
907 - FA - 1063 - 2002.docx
Nos. 2 and 3 (i.e., the owner and the driver of the vehicle). He submits
that by the impugned judgment and award dated 1st November 2001,
the claimant, that is, Respondent No. 1, who is the mother of the
deceased Mahipal Sevaram Wadhawani, who met with an accident on
1st January 1993, has been awarded compensation of Rs. 79,000/-
along with the interest.
4. Mr. Aryan Sawant, learned Advocate for Respondent Nos. 2 and
3, requests for dismissal of this Appeal for the absence of the parties.
5. In view of the absence of the Appellant / Advocate for the
Appellant, this Court is left with no alternative but to dismiss this
Appeal for non-prosecution.
6. First Appeal No. 1063 of 2002 is dismissed for non-prosecution.
(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)
VRJ 2
Checking your session…