Bombay High Court
AJAY JAIDEV ARYAversusBAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.
- Decided
- Disposal
- Dismissed for non-complying conditional Order
Holding
The Court held that although default ordinarily leads to dismissal, it may, in the interest of justice, grant a further opportunity to supply the required copies.
Summary
The applicant’s advocate failed to appear and did not supply the required copies of documents for issuing notices to Respondent Nos. 1 and 2, despite being granted a two‑week extension. The matter was listed for a second time, and the Registrar noted that under Chapter VII, Rule 2(iii) of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960, such default normally warrants dismissal. However, the Court exercised its discretion to give the applicant one more opportunity to comply. The advocate was directed to furnish the necessary copies within another two‑week period, failing which the interim application will be dismissed. If the copies are supplied, notices will be issued and the matter will be returnable within ten weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether the failure to supply copies within the prescribed time mandates dismissal under the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960.
- Whether the Court may extend the time despite the applicant’s default.
Subjects
- Procedural law
- Court rules
- Default
- Dismissal
- Interim application
- Bombay High Court
Judgment
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. 9
THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 38343 OF 2025
IN
FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 34110 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 : DR. M. S. DESHPANDE
REGISTRAR (JUDL -II)
DATE : 08/04/2026
None Present
The learned advocate for the applicant is absent.
His absence is unexplained.
The above numbered Interim Application is 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 and 2.
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 Application would
stand dismissed against respondent Nos. 1 and 2
without further reference to the Court of Registrar. If
copies are supplied, issue notices to respondent Nos. 1
an 2, returnable by ten weeks.
Sd/-
REGISTRAR (JUDL-II)
sat-R(J-II)-08.04.2026
Checking your session…