Bombay High CourtCRA/265/2025dismissed for noncomplying conditional order

Smt Harsha A. Vernekar Thr Constitued Attorney Amar Vernekar v. M/S D.S.P. Enterprise And ORS.

2026-01-27Shri. S.R. Agrawal, Registrar(Judl Ii)4 pages

[Spl. --H.C.A.S.C.D. 79c FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

APPELLATE SIDE District : MUMBAI CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 265 OF 2025 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders CORAM :- S.R. AGRAWAL REGISTRAR (JUDL.-II) DATE :- 27st January 2026.

Adv. Abheek Melwani i/by Rajeev Sawant and Associates for Applicant present. The above numbered Civil Revision Application(Stamp) is listed on board of Registrar second time. Already two weeks time has been granted, however, despite granting two weeks time, the office objections are not removed.

Here reference to Chapter V of the Bombay High Court, Appellate Side Rules, 1960 (for short "Rules") may be conveniently made. It states about Procedure after presentation, Removal of office objections etc. In view of provisions under Chapter V, Rule 3 (ii), the Advocates / Parties are expected to remove office objections within 14 days from the date of notification.

Rule (5) further provides that, if the office objection are not removed as provided under Rule 3, the Office shall place the matter before the Registrar, who shall refuse the

registration of such all matters.

As such, the prescribed time to remove the office objections 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 due to non removal of office objections. However, instead of passing order of refusal of registration or dismissal outrightly, it would be just and proper to give one opportunity to remove the office objections.

In turn, 02 (two) weeks time is granted with directions to remove the office objections without fail. On failure, registration would stand refused without further reference to the Court of Registrar. No further extension will be granted.

sd/- umk Registrar (Judl.-II)

[Spl. --H.C.A.S.C.D. 79c FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

Adv. Abheek Melwani i/by Rajeev Sawant and Associates for Applicant present. The above numbered Civil Revision Application is listed on board of Registrar for second time. Already two weeks time has been granted, however, despite granting two weeks time, Advocate for the Applicant has not taken any steps against unserved respondent Nos. 1 and 4.

Here reference to Chapter VII Rule 6 Sub rule 1 and 2 of the Bombay High Court, Appellate Side Rules, 1960 (for short "Rules") may be conveniently made. It states about Processes, Process fees, Printing Charges, Security for costs and other procedure after admission etc.

In view of provisions under chapter VII Rule 6(1) (e), immediately after the expiry of the period prescribed under the forgoing sub-rule of this rule for taking the requisite steps for

the issue of fresh notice or for supplying postal stamps to cover the postal and registration charges, the office shall place before the Registrar all such matters in which steps have not been taken for the issue fresh notices or the postal stamps to cover the postal and registration charges have not been supplied within the prescribed time, and the Registrar shall dismiss the matter for failure to prosecute.

As such, the prescribed time to take steps against unserved respondent Nos. 1 and 4 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 due to not taken any steps.

However, instead of passing order of dismissal outrightly, it would be just and proper to give one opportunity to take steps against unserved respondent Nos. 1 and 4.

In turn, 02 (two) weeks time is granted with directions to take steps against unserved respondent Nos. 1 and 4 without fail. On failure, Civil Revision Application would stand dismissed against unserved respondent Nos.

1 and 4 without further reference to the court of Registrar.

sd/- umk Registrar (Judl.-II)