National Insurance Company Ltd., ... vs Piru Chandu Reghiwale And Others
2017 Latest Caselaw 6332 Bom

caf883.16.odt                                                                                                                      1/2



                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                              NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

                              CIVIL APPLICATION (F) No.883 OF 2016
                                              IN
                               FIRST APPEAL ST. No.12468 OF 2015
                                                                     
(National Insurance Company Ltd., through the Regional Manager, Nagpur  Vs. Piru Chandu
                                 Reghiwale and others)
__________________________________________________________________________
Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram,
appearances, Court's orders of directions                                  Court's or Judge's orders.
and Registrar's Orders.
                                                 
                                             None for the Applicant.
                                             Shri S.A. Mohta, Advocate for the Respondent No.1.

CORAM : S.B. SHUKRE , J .

                                                               
                                                    th
                                    DATE    :    16
                                                       AUGUST, 2017.

                                                            None for the applicant.

Shri S.A. Mohta, learned counsel for respondent No.1.

Costs of Rs.5,000/- have not been paid to respondent No.1 within stipulated time, as prescribed under order dated 7.6.2017 passed by this Court, as submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent No.1. The appellant has also not placed on record any Pursis showing his compliance with the order dated 7 th June, 2017. Costs of Rs.5,000/- were to be paid to the respondent No.1 within a period of three weeks from 7 th June, 2017, that period has expired long back and there is no payment of costs to the respondent No.1. These events would clearly show that there is non-compliance with the order dated 7th June, 2017 and, therefore, the consequence of the non-compliance as mentioned in this very order

caf883.16.odt 2/2

would follow. This consequence is of dismissal of the application for condonation of delay automatically and without reference to the Court.

The application is accordingly treated as dismissed.

JUDGE

DWW