Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Integrated with over 4 crore judgments and laws — designed for legal practitioners, researchers, students and institutions

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 6]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

M/S New Tech Abrasives Limited ... vs Union Of India Thru.Ministry Of Finance ... on 17 April, 2017

     IN MATTERS NOTIFIED AT SERIAL  NOS. 1001 TO 1006 ON THE BOARD DATED
               17.04.2017 DUE TO NON­COMPLIANCE OF COURT ORDER
                                        
     17.04.2017
              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
     non­prosecution without further reference to the Court.
              Provided, however, in cases, where the objection/default is about non­
     service   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 1006                              19/06/2017




      
              (P. K. Jaiswal)                                                      (Virender Singh)
                   Judge                                                                 Judge
PP