Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 95]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Omprakash Upadhyay vs Shri S.R. Mohanti on 19 June, 2017

      IN MATTERS NOTIFIED AT SERIAL  NOS.1001 to 1020, 1021 to 1040, 1041 to 1060, 1061 to
       1080, 1081 to 1100, 1101 to 1120, 1121 to 1140, 1141 to 1160 and 1161 to 1163 ON THE
              BOARD DATED 19.06.2017 DUE TO NON­COMPLIANCE OF COURT ORDER 

     19.06.2017
                The Court proposes to pass this  common conditional order to obviate passing of identical
     conditional order in these matters involving similar office objection/default.
                In all these matters, due to non­removal of office objection within the prescribed time as
     per  the  Rules,   the  concerned   matter   was  placed   before  the  Registrar   in  the  first  instance.   The
     Registrar   granted   sufficient   time   to   the   petitioner(s)/applicant(s)/appellant(s)   to   cure   the
     defect/office   objection,   however,   due   to   non­removal   of   office   objection/default   within   the
     prescribed time, the concerned matter was required to be once again listed before the Court.  The
     Court granted further time, by passing common order on the earlier occasion.
                Inspite of repeated opportunity (three times­one under Rules, second by the Registrar and
     third   by   Court),   the   petitioner(s)/applicant(s)/appellant(s)   has   failed   to   cure   the   office
     objection/default.  As a result, by way of indulgence and last opportunity, in terms of this order,
     SIX WEEKS' further time is granted to the petitioner(s)/applicant(s)/appellant(s) in the respective
     matters to remove office objection/default and make the matter ready for further hearing within
     that time, failing which the concerned petition/application/appeal shall stand dismissed for non­
     prosecution without further reference to the Court.
                Provided, however, in cases, where the objection/default is about non­service of any
     of   the   respondent,   on   expiry   of   the   extended   period,   the   concerned   matter   will   stand

dismissed   for   non­prosecution   only   against   the   unserved   respondent(s),   without   further reference to the Court.  The matter would then proceed against the remaining respondent(s).

In cases where the office objection/default has already been cured before passing of this order,   it  will   be  open  to   the   concerned   party   to   bring   that   fact   to   the   notice   of  the   Registrar (Judicial­II), who may examine the same and proceed with the matter as per the listing /scheme, if ready for hearing.

If the office objections are removed within the time extended in terms of this order, the concerned matter(s) be made returnable on the date notified hereafter.

S. No. Cases as per Cause List No. Returnable Dates 1 1001 to 1020 03/08/2017 2 1021 to 1040 04/08/2017 3 1041 to 1060 08/08/2017 4 1061 to 1080 09/08/2017 5 1081 to 1100 10/08/2017 6 1101 to 1120 11/08/2017 7 1121 to 1140 16/08/2017 8 1141 to 1160 17/08/2017 9 1161 to 1163 18/08/2017   (P. K. Jaiswal)                  Judge PP