AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The matter is taken up for hearing by way of praecipe filed by the appellants for seeking urgent relief.
No representation for the Appellant despite repeated calls.
The Learned Counsel for the Respondent would submit that the Appellant has filed an application seeking refund/release of the mandatory pre-deposit without filing any application for withdrawal of the present Appeal.
The Learned Counsel for the Respondent would further submit that, as per the instructions received by him, the Appellant has deposited only a sum of ₹35 lakhs towards the mandatory pre-deposit, whereas the application seeks release/refund of ₹40 lakhs along with the accrued interest in favour of Appellant No. 1. He would further submit that during the pendency of the Appeal, the mandatory pre-deposit cannot be refunded/released. Therefore, the application has to be disallowed.
However, without going into the merits of the above submission, in view of the no representation for the Appellant despite repeated calls, the present Appeal No. 130/2024 is dismissed for default for non-prosecution.
All pending, I.As., if any, stand dismissed.