Proceedings cannot be dismissed for failure to take service steps absent a recorded direction to issue notice.

The petitioners challenged the order dated 17 July 2026 dismissing Misc. P. No. 7/2018 for failure to take steps to serve notice on certain respondents

They contended that parties for whom notice had been ordered were served or represented by counsel, while the remaining respondents had been placed ex parte

On reviewing the trial-court order sheet, the High Court found appearances by counsel for some parties but no notation that notice had been ordered to the respondents for whom steps were allegedly not taken

1. Whether the trial court’s dismissal of Misc. P. No. 7/2018 for failure to take steps for service of notice was sustainable when the order sheet did not show that notice had been ordered to the respondents concerned?

2. Whether the petitioners should be permitted to pursue the restored miscellaneous petition while taking any necessary steps for service within a reasonable time?

The High Court exercised its jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, invoked by the petitioners

It held, on the circumstances of this case, that an order dismissing a proceeding for failure to take service steps could not stand where the order sheet contained no notation or finding that notice had been ordered to the respondents in respect of whom steps were said to be outstanding

No specific statutory provision or precedent was cited.

The order sheet recorded appearances by counsel for some parties but did not record that notice had been ordered to the respondents for whom the petitioners were said to have failed to take steps

In the absence of that record, the dismissal lacked a stated basis.

The petitioners also undertook to complete any service steps found necessary within a reasonable time, supporting restoration rather than dismissal