A single judge order in a summary suit execution matter where the plaintiff was absent. The court admitted the plaintiff's affidavit averments and allowed the motion subject to payment of costs to the State Legal Services Authority.
Motion made absolute subject to payment of costs of Rs.500/- to the State Legal Services Authority.
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 OF BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1031 OF 2003
IN
SUMMONS FOR JUDGEMENT NO. 84 OF 2002
IN
SUMMARY SUIT NO. 1924 OF 2001
M/s.Amrat Wire Ropes .. Plaintiff
versus
M/s.Jawahar Enterprise .. Defendant
Mr.S.G. Deshpande for the plaintiff.
None for the defendant.
CORAM : D.G. KARNIK,J.
DATED : 11th March 2005.
P.C.:
1. None present for the plaintiff.
2. No affidavit in reply has been filed. In the
circumstances, the averments made in the affidavit in
support explaining the absence are deemed to be
admitted. Hence, for the reasons mentioned in
paragraph no.6 to 8 of the affidavit in support,
motion is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a)
subject to payment of costs of Rs.500/- to the State
Legal Services Authority.
D.G. KARNIK, J
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the motion for execution of a summary suit ought to be allowed in the absence of plaintiff and without an affidavit in reply.
M.s.Amrat Wire Ropes
M.s.Jawahar Enterprise
D.G. KARNIK
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court