1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA First Appeal No. 220 of 2000 (M.C.A. No. 231/2010 with Stamp Number (Appln) No. 767/2010 ) with First Appeal No. 40 of 2001 (M.C.A. No. 232/2010 with Stamp Number (Appln) No. 776/2010 ) State of Goa & Anr. ... Appellants V e r s u s Shri Anand R. Naik ... Respondent Mr. G. Shirodkar, Government Advocate for the Appellants. CORAM : D. G. KARNIK, J. DATED : 3 rd SEPTEMBER, 2010. P.C.: Oral order dated 2nd September, 2010 passed in Stamp Number (Appln) No. 776 of 2010 and Stamp Number ( Appln ) no. 775 of 2010 is recalled in view of the fact that the earlier orders passed in M.C.A. No. 231/2010 and M.C.A. No.232/2010 were not brought to the notice of the Court. 2. Shri Anand Naik, the respondent in First Appeal No. 220 of 2000 has died on 12th October, 2007. His heirs were not brought on record. Though formal order of abatement was not passed, the appeals stood abated automatically. No formal order of abatement is necessary. 2 The Appellants made an application No. 231/2010 for setting aside abatement and condonation of delay and bringing on record the heirs of the deceased Respondent. By an order dated 13th August, 2010, the application was allowed i.e. to say the delay in making the application for setting aside abatement was condoned, the abatement was set aside and the appellants were allowed to bring on record the heirs of the deceased respondent. 3. Despite the order dated 13th August, 2010, the amendment was not carried out and the legal representatives of the deceased were not brought on record. The amendment is required to be carried out within 14 days as per the rules. However, as the amendment was not carried out within 14 days, the matter was placed before the Court. 4. Rule (1) of Chapter XII of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960 confers power on the Registrar to dismiss the proceedings in default. It says, where no action has been taken by the party or the Advocate within time prescribed by these Rules, office shall forthwith place the matter before the Registrar and, except as otherwise provided for in this rule, the Registrar shall dismiss the matter for default. The Rule also confers power to the Registrar to condone the delay where there is default. The power to dismiss a matter in default as well as the power to condone the delay in case of default is expressly conferred on 3 the Registrar of the Court. As the Registrar has the necessary powers, the matter has been wrongly placed on board of the Court. The matter is required to be placed before the Registrar who may condone the delay or dismiss the appeal, as may be appropriate, by virtue of his powers under Rule (1) of Chapter XII of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960. 5. It is noticed that several matters which are required to be dealt with by the Registrar are placed before the Court instead of placing them before the Registrar. Unnecessarily, the time of the Court is spent in dealing with the matters which are required to be placed before the Registrar under the Rules. Hence, the office is directed henceforth that the matters which are required to be dealt with by the Registrar shall not be placed before the Court and shall only be placed before the Registrar. Even in the past, such direction has been issued by the Court. This direction appears to have been ignored by the office. Henceforth, if any such matter which is required to be placed before the Registrar is placed on board of the Court, without its leave, the Registrar shall initiate action against the concerned person. D. G. KARNIK, J. at*