Allowed

Mrs. S. Umavati Shetty and Ors. v. Salauddin Mohamed Sami

Bombay HC12 Jul 2005NMS/1563/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay restored a suit dismissed for want of prosecution to the file. Relying on the plaintiff's advocate's affidavit citing failing health as the cause for non-appearance, the court held the plaintiff should not suffer and directed the matter be heard on merits.

What did the court decide?

Suit restored on file; all interim orders restored; Notice of Motion disposed off; Plaintiff to pay costs of Rs.1,500/-.

Mrs. S. Umavati Shetty and Ors. Vs Salauddin… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2005)

¶1

 ((-1-))

¶2

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
 ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1563 OF 2005
 IN
 SUIT NO.2567 OF 1996

¶4

 Mrs.S.Umavati Shetty and others Plaintiffs

¶5

 versus

¶6

 Salauddin Mohamed Sami Defendant

¶7

 Ms.Purnima G. Bhatia for plaintiff.

¶8

 Mr.Santosh Shetty i/by M.P.Vashi for defendant.

¶9

 CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.

¶10

 DATE : 12th July 2005

¶11

 PC :

¶12

 1. The plaintiff has moved this Notice of Motion
 because the suit has been dismissed for want of
 prosecution on 16th April 2004.

¶13

 2. Advocate appearing for the plaintiff, who is
 73 years of age, has filed his personal affidavit
 pointing out that on account of his failing
 health, he has been not appearing regularly in
 this Court. The briefs have been assigned by him
 to the junior advocates and insofar as this
 matter is concerned, inadvertently the brief

¶14

 ((-2-))

¶15

 could not be assigned and he also could not
 remain present when the matter was called out on
 16th April 2004. Although, this fact is denied
 by the defendants, in my view, in the light of
 the affidavit filed by the advocate pointing out
 his mistake, the plaintiffs should not suffer and
 they deserve a chance for the suit being heard on
 merits. Accordingly, Notice of Motion is made
 absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). Suit
 restored on file. To be heard on merits and in
 accordance with law. All interim orders passed
 in the suit are also restored. Plaintiff to pay
 costs quantified at Rs.1,500/-. Notice of Motion
 disposed off.

¶16

 (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.)

Mrs. S. Umavati Shetty and Ors. v. Salauddin Mohamed Sami

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs. S. Umavati Shetty and Ors. v. Salauddin Mohamed Sami

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Forties Financial Services Ltd. Vs M/S Good Value Marketing Co.Ltd. and Anr.

Icici Bank Ltd. Vs Dr. Sushil S. Shirodkar

Bank of India Vs Dinesh K. Wagh and Anr.

Rajmani R.Nair Vs Smita S.Patil and Anr.

Ashok R. Shah Vs Vandanbhai P. Gosalia

Bombay Intelligence Security India Ltd. Vs M/S. Vignesh Impex Pvt. Ltd.