§5§Q§e gwm In the Heigh court ofJudicature at Bilaspur (C.G.) Mic. Civil appeal -—-E§-’-€-—/05 ,M/s Derolian Solvant product @ia Ltd. company incorporated under company Act 1956 Reg. Office Viilege Pandari Tah. Takhatpur Dist. Biiaspur (C.G.) through it managing director Shri Satry Narayan Sharma R/o Viliege Pandari Tah. Takhatpur Dist. Biiaspur (C.G.) ....................................................... Applicant / J.d. Y/s M/s mahajan brother s partnership firm Reg under partnership Act 1932 Through it’s partner madhav Roa Slo Govmd Roa Mahajan, ltwan , Nagpur................................................ Respondent p \Qfz" 337' order Misc Appeal at 12Y/1/ U/O43 o5 R1 m (J) T01 agarst /96 3 5+ 9?’ By.‘6/strict Judgi Bilaspur (Shri R.N. Chandrakar) Memo of Appeal A5 XI—HC—22 HW,WW,W Wm m.z2...’—f.?.4./°‘/ 200 V WW {Mega “i WW mm WW WW§WW éswm 10l0§12005 M.A. 374/05 (Mfs Derolian Solvant Product Ltd. Vs. M/s Mahajan brother’s pattnership) was listed before Hon'ble court on 01.04.05, and on that date Hon'ble court directed“x the appeHant to femove the defaults as painted / out by the ofhce within seven days, failing which the abpeai shall be liable to be dismissed without reference ta the Bench. From the report of Filing Cierk dated 16.5.2005 (kindly see Note Sheet part) it is apparent that the counsel for the appellant has not removed the defaults by hllng appropriate application and also by filing typed copies of page no; 14 and 15, as per‘court order dated 1.4.2005, defaults should have been removed within a week from the date of order Le. on or before 08.4.2005. Thus, counsel has failed to comply with the Hon'ble court order dated 1.4.2005. ‘In View of the above and per- emptory order dated 1.04.2005 'the appeal stood dismissed without reference to the Bench./ ‘ Counsel be informed accordingly. / sal- // AR (J) l/ (waited)