The petitioner failed to appear in person or by counsel. The High Court dismissed the review petition in default.
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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORIGINAL SIDE
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3087 OF 2004 IN REVIEW PETITION (LODGING) NO.42 OF 2004 IN APPEAL NO.437 OF 1999 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1470 OF 1998 IN SUIT NO.1334 OF 1998
Owne Richard Bernard Roncon Petitioner vs. Mary Philomena alias Millie Roncon nee D’Souza Respondent
None for the petitioner.
Mr.A.Anandan for the respondent.
CORAM : R. M. LODHA & J.P. DEVADHAR,JJ . DATED : 17th March, 2006
P.C.
None appears for the petitioner. Mr.A.Anandan,
advocate appears for the respondent.
dismissed in default.
Owe Richard Bernard Roncon
Mary Philomena alias Millie Roncon nee D'Souza
R. M. LODHA
J.P. DEVADHAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
