18. Dismissal of appeal where notice not served in consequence of appellant’s failure to deposit costs.- Omitted HIGH COURT AMENDMENTS Allahabad.- In para (1), for the words “where on the day fixed or on any other day to which the hearing may be adjourned,” substitute the words ‘when the appeal is called for hearing” (22.121951).
Andhra Pradesh.- Same as that of Madras. Bombay, Goa, Daman and Diu.- In Order XLI, after the existing Rule 18 insert the following rule with marginal note as new Rule 18-A and its marginal note:— “18-A. Dismissal for want of prosecution.— Where after the admission of an appeal the rules or the special directions of the Court require the appellant to take any steps in the prosecution of the appeal before a fixed date, and where after due notice intimating the steps to be taken the appellant fails to take such steps within the time prescribed by be rules or allowed by the Court, the Court may direct the appeal to be dismissed for Want of prosecution or may pass such other order as it thinks fit, (1.10.1983) and (1.4.1987). Madras and Pondicherry.- Alter the words “costs of serving the notice” insert the words “or if the notice is returned unserved, to deposit within any subsequent period fixed, the sum required to defray the costs of any further attempt to serve the notice.
| 