Suresh Narayan Pande v. Allahabad Bank Thr.Br.Manager And 2 Others

1 0806sa110.03

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR SECOND APPEAL NO.110 OF 2003 SURESH NARAYAN PANDE VS ALLAHABAD BANK AND OTHERS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri N. R. Saboo, Advocate for the appellant. Ms. Sapkal, Advocate for respondent Nos.2 & 3. CORAM : A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.

DATED : JUNE 08, 2017.

Shri Saboo, learned Counsel for the appellant states that on 29-3-2017 a registered letter was issued to the appellant to seek necessary instructions in view of the fact that the appellate Court had decreed the suit by its judgment dated 9-10-2002 and this decree was not stayed during pendency of the second appeal. According to him, he has no instructions as to whether the said decree has been executed. Ms. Sapkal, learned Counsel appears for the respondent Nos.2 & 3 who are original defendant Nos.2 & 3 and she also does not have instructions as to the execution of the aforesaid decree.

As the appellant has not responded to the communication issued by his learned Counsel and has not given any instructions, the appeal stands dismissed for want of prosecution. No costs.

JUDGE /MULEY/