Vandana Namdeo Athawale v. Namdeo Madhav Athawale

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO. 28/2014 Smt. Vandana w/o Namdeo Athawale ...

APPELLANT

Versus

Mr.Namdeo Madhav Athawale ... RESPONDENT

CORAM:

VIJAY S.KULKARNI REGISTRAR (JUDL) DATED: 17/02/2015 1.

Perused Record and proceedings. The objection notified by the office is that printing charges are not paid by the appellant till expiry of date within which delay can be excused. About three chances have been given to the appellant for depositing the printing charges. No steps have been taken by the appellant to deposit printing charges. There is no representation on behalf of the appellant. Thus, it is crystal clear that the appellant is not interested in depositing the printing charges or removing the objection. Therefore, I have no option than to pass following order.

ORDER

Appeal is dismissed for failure to prosecute. REGISTRAR (JUDL) fca28.14