(Passed on 04.02.2013)
Per Mr S M Shembole, Hon’ble Presiding Member
Both the appellants as well as their counsel are absent. Adv. Ms. S Ghatole for respondent No.1 and Adv. Mr J Vora for respondent No.2 are present.
On 11.09.2012 notice was issued to the respondents No.3 & 4 but no report about service of notice is received. Office copy of the notice reflects that it was issued on correct address of the respondents No.3 & 4 as shown in the appeal memo. Hence, it will have to be presumed that they are served with notice but they are absent. Hence, appeal to proceed exparte against them.
The record reflects that the appellants as well as their counsel are absent since prior to 18.04.2011. Therefore, on 18.04.2011 notice was issued to the appellants as well as respondents but no report about service of notice to appellants is received. Office copy of the notice reflects that it was issued on correct address of appellants. Therefore, it will have to be presumed that they are served with notice; but they are absent. Hence, appeal deserves to be dismissed in default.
Moreover, there is also an application of condonation of delay pending since the year 2006. There was inordinate delay of more than 44 days. But no plausible explanation appears to have been given. Therefore, on this ground also the appeal deserves to be dismissed. Hence, it be recalled at 3.00 p.m. for order.
Matter is recalled at 1.30 p.m.; but nobody for the appellant is present. Adv. Mr J Vora for respondent No.2 is present.
Hence, appeal is dismissed in default.
No order as to cost.
Copy of this order be supplied to the parties.
