Suit based on a bill of exchange. Defendants had no instructions to appear. Due to absence of reply to the summons for judgment, the suit was decreed with interest and costs, and disposed of.
The suit was decreed with 12% future interest on the principal and costs; decree drawn up.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT NO. 102 OF 2003
IN
SUMMARY SUIT NO. 4989 OF 2000
Manoj K. Luthria ..Plaintiff
versus
Pleasant Plastic Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. ..Defendants
Mr. P. S. Anand for the Plaintiff.
Ms. Parvati Kaushik i/b. B. S. Chandnani for the
Defendants.
CORAM : D. G. DESHPANDE,J.
DATE : 11TH OCTOBER 2004.
P.C. :
. Heard counsel for the parties. Counsel for
the defendants state that they have no instructions
in the matter and that they have filed vakalatnama.
. It appears from the roznama dated 11.8.2004
that Mr. R. Shukla for the defendants had appeared
and he made a statement that settlement talks are
going on between the parties.
. Counsel for the Plaintiff tenders List of
original documents. The same are taken on record.
The suit of the plaintiff is based on a bill of
exchange. The claim in the suit is Rs.54,999/=
principal amount is Rs.50,000/=. Since there is no
reply to the summons for judgment, the suit stands
decreed as prayed for with 12% future interest on
the principal amount from the date of the suit till
realisation and costs. Refund of court fees, as per
the Rules. Decree be drawn up accordingly. Suit
and Summons for Judgment both stands disposed of
accordingly. Certified copy expedited.
*****
1 provisions across 1 enactments
D. G. Deshpande
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court