1 N1996-09.sxw pps IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Notice No.1996 of 2009 in Execution Application No.484 of 2009 in H/03/298 Madhavpura Mercantile Co-op.Bank Ltd. .. Claimants v/s. Gauri Shankar Textiles P. Ltd. & Others ..Opponents Mr.A.K.Sharma i/b. B.B.Nangare & Associates for the Claimants. CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. DATED : 21st January, 2011 P.C. : 1. This notice is under Order 21 Rule 22 of CPC. It was made returnable on 9.2.2010 by order dated 11.12.2009. This means claimants were required to take steps to serve the notice upon the opponents and take further steps. The learned Counsel for the claimants applied for some time to serve Notices. I enquired with him whether at any time in the past attempt was made to serve. He 2 N1996-09.sxw answered in the negative. This will go to show that from January 2010 till today no steps are taken under Order 21 Rule 22 of CPC . This will mean that the conduct of the claimants will have to be termed as negligence on the part of the claimants. If for one year they have not taken any steps to serve, I see no reason to show any indulgence despite the repeated requests made by the counsel for the petitioner. In my view, the only course open for the court is to dismiss the notice. Hence the following order is passed. ORDER i. Notice is dismissed for want to prosecution as no steps are taken to serve expeditiously. ii) In view of this, Execution Application No.484 of 2009 cannot proceed. Iii) There shall be no order as to costs. [R.Y.GANOO, J.]