Bombay High Court
MAHARASHTRA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION LTD.(MSRTC) THR.DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER MSRTCversusTAI SITARAM VARGUDE AND ORS.
- Decided
- Disposal
- Dismissed for non-complying conditional Order
Holding
The court held that, while dismissal is permissible under the Rules for failure to supply copies, a further opportunity must be given to the applicant to comply before dismissal is effected.
Summary
The applicant filed an interim application seeking the issuance of notice to respondent No. 1 in a pending case. The applicant’s advocate failed to furnish the required copies of documents within the two‑week period previously granted by the court. Under Chapter VII, Rule 2(iii) of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960, failure to supply copies and pay process fees can lead to dismissal for non‑prosecution. The court noted the lapse of the prescribed time and the applicant’s inaction, but instead of an immediate dismissal, it exercised discretion to grant a further two‑week extension. The advocate was directed to submit the necessary copies within this period, failing which the interim application would be dismissed and notice to the respondents would not be issued. If the copies are supplied, the court will issue notice to respondent No. 1, with a return date set for ten weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether the interim application should be dismissed for non‑prosecution due to failure to supply required copies within the time prescribed by the Rules.
Subjects
- Procedural law
- Court Rules
- Non‑prosecution
- Interim application
- Supply of copies
- Bombay High Court
Judgment
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. 2
THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 30292 OF 2022
IN
REJECTED CASE NO 657 OF 2019
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court’s or Judge’s order
appearance, Court’s Orders or directions and
Registrar’s orders
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : DR. M. S. DESHPANDE
REGISTRAR (JUDL -II)
DATE : 25/06/2026
None Present
The above numbered Interim Application is
listed for second time on the Board of Registrar for
supplying copies. Already two weeks time was granted.
Despite granting two weeks time, the Advocate for the
Applicant has not supplied copies for issuing Notice to
respondent No. 1 (respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are minor
but guardian not mentioned).
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 idle 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 Application would
stand dismissed against respondent Nos. 1 to 3 without
further reference to the Court of Registrar. If copies are
supplied, issue notice to respondent No. 1, returnable
by ten weeks.
Sd/-
REGISTRAR (JUDL-II)
sat-R(J-II)-25.06.2026
Checking your session…