Dismissed
Miss T.v.Shah v. Mrs. Panna Shah and Ors.
Bombay HCS/416/1985
Case brief
AI extract
What is this about?
Suit dismissed after learned counsel for absent plaintiff reported no instructions and stated the plaintiff migrated to Australia without giving her address.
What did the court decide?
Suit dismissed under Order 9 Rule 3 CPC.
What the court decided
AI extract
¶1
| IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUD |
ICATURE | AT | BOMBAY |
|---|---|---|---|
| ORDINARY ORIGINAL |
CIVIL | JURI | SDICTION |
| SUIT NO.416 |
of | 1985 | |
| Ms Tara Shah .. Plaintiff |
|||
| versus | |||
| Ms Panna Shah & ors .. Defendants |
|||
| Mr. Deverta Singh i/b Tha.Mad |
gavkar | for | Plaintiff |
| CORAM : |
D.G. | KARNI | K, J |
| DATED : |
11th | August, | 2005. |
| P.C. | |||
| 1. Learned counsel for the |
plaintiff | reports | no |
| instructions and states that t |
he |
plaintiff | has |
| migrated to Australia without giv |
ing her |
address. | |
| The plaintiff is absent when called. |
Th | e suit |
is |
| dismissed under Order 9 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure. |
¶2
D.G.KARNIK, J
Coram
AI extract
D.G. KARNIK
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court