The High Court of Judicature at Bombay dismissed the appeal for default as none appeared on the first hearing or second occasion.
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 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
FIRST APPEAL NO. 360 OF 2006
.......................................................... Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram, appearance, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders
Court’s or Judge’s orders
Mr. J.J. Xevier, for Respondent.
CORAM : A.S. OKA, J. DATE : 11TH AUGUST 2006
| P.C. : | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Non |
e | appears for |
the |
| Appellants | when | the Appeal |
was |
| called out. |
Therefore, the |
Appeal | |
| was kept |
back. | On second |
occasion |
| when the |
Appeal | is called out |
none |
| appears | for | the |
Appellant. |
| Advocate | for | Respondent | No.1 |
| states |
that th |
e application |
made |
| for condonation | of delay | is | |
| rejected. |
JUDGE
A.S. Oka, J.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
