The Oriental Insurance Company Limited v. Madu Venkateswaramma And Another

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY MACMA No.88 of 2006 ORDER:

When the matter came up for hearing on 17-02-2017, this Court passed order permitting the learned counsel for the appellant-insurance company to serve personal notice on the un-served respondents 1 and 2, with a default clause that in case of failure to comply the same, the claim against the respondents stands dismissed. Since the same is not complied, appeal stood dismissed against R1 and R2 by the said order.

2.

It is seen from the docket sheet that several adjournments at the request of the appellant's counsel on 27-07-2017, 11-08-2017, 15-09-2017, 23-10-2017 and 07-11-2017 were taken for taking steps and even today the same representation is made seeking further time. When appeal stood dismissed against both the respondents by order dated 17-02-2017 and when no application is filed for setting aside the same, adjourning the same does not arise.

3.

This conduct on the part of the appellant indicates that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the matter. Hence, the appeal stands dismissed as it is dismissed for default against both the respondents. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending shall also stand dismissed. No order as to costs.

_____________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J Dated: 25-01-2018 NRG

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY MACMA No.88 of 2006 //WEB// 25-01-2018 NRG