In a notable ruling, the Bombay High Court has established that the Registrar General of the Court has no power to order for 'mass dismissal' of cases for Non-Removal of Objections.
The single-judge bench of Justice Riyaz Chagla in this view recalled the Prothonotary & Senior Master’s September 15, 2022 notice dismissing civil suits filed before December 2021, in default, for non-removal of office objections within eight weeks.
Restoring the dismissed suits to the High Court’s records, the Court opined that the impugned are clearly contrary to Rule 986 of the Bombay High Court (O.S.) Rules, 1980 as the common notice was issued without listing of the matters.
The common notices issued by the Prothonotary & Senior Master of this Court on 15th September 2022 are clearly contrary to Rule 986 of the Bombay High Court (O.S.) Rules, 1980 as the common notice was issued without listing of the matters, which are the subject matter of these notices. In my considered view, there is no power to issue such blanket directions of removal of office objections within the period stipulated in the common notices without first listing these matters and accordingly, the common notices dated 15th September 2022 are being recalled, " the order reads.
The Counsel for the writ-petitioners submitted that they were not even aware of the Suit having been rejected pursuant to the common notice dated 15th September 2022 and referred to Rule 986 of the Bombay High Court (O.S.) Rules, 1980.
He submitted that the rejection of inter alia the Plaint/Suit contemplated by this Rule is only effected when office objections have not been removed within 30 days from the lodging of the Plaint and prior to which the matter is placed before the Prothonotary & Senior Master of this Court for directions. Only then can the discretion be exercised by the Prothonotary & Senior Master of this Court to either reject the Plaint for non-removal of office objections or grant further time, he added.
He averred that the Suits were required to be placed on board for directions by the Prothonotary & Senior Master of this Court as per Rule 986 of the Bombay High Court (O.S.) Rules, 1980 prior to passing blanket directions for removal of office objections within eight weeks.
The other Counsel for the applicants, citing a full-bench ruling of the court in which it was held that tthe Prothonotary has the power to restore the proceeding which he had dismissed under Rule 986 of the Bombay High Court (O.S.) Rules, 1980, submitted that in the present case, the common notices issued by the Prothonotary & Senior Master of this Court dated 15th September 2022 be recalled as being contrary to Rule 986 of the Bombay High Court (O.S.) Rules, 1980 in view of the matters not being listed prior to their rejection.
The Court accordingly allowed the application.
CASE TITLE: Lok Everest Co-op. Hsg. Soc. Ltd. Versus M/s. Jaydeep Developers & Ors.
CASE DETAILS: INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 308 OF 2019 IN SUIT (L) NO. 1132 OF 2019
CORAM: Justice Riyaz Chagla
Advocates for Petitioner: Dr. Abhinav Chandrachud a/w Ms. Ashwini Patil i/by Solicis Lex for the Plaintiff.
Advocates for Respondent: Mr. Vishal Narichania a/w Jugal Haria, Srinidhi Suryavanshi i/by Neeta Solanki for the Defendant No. 1.
Social media is bold.
Social media is young.
Social media raises questions.
Social media is not satisfied with an answer.
Social media looks at the big picture.
Social media is interested in every detail.
social media is curious.
Social media is free.
Social media is irreplaceable.
But never irrelevant.
Social media is you.
(With input from news agency language)
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our journalism free from government and corporate pressure .
0 Comments