In Suit No. 1825 of 1985, the High Court at Bombay adjourned the suit twice due to the plaintiffs' non-appearance. The court dismissed the suit for non-prosecition, concluding the plaintiffs were not interested in continuing it.
Suit dismissed for non-prosecution.
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
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
SUIT NO.1825 OF 1985
The Delhi Tambaku & Udyog P.Ltd.
...Plaintiffs
vs.
Meena Pimplapure...Defendant
None for the Plaintiffs
CORAM: A.S.OKA,J.
DATE : OCTOBER 10,2007
P.C.:
1. On 3rd October 2007, none appeared or the plaintiffs.
Therefore, the suit was adjourned till today. When the suit
was called out today, none appears for the plaintiffs. It is
obvious that the plaintiffs are not interested in prosecuting
the suit. Hence, the suit is dismissed for non prosecution.
JUDGE
The Delhi Tambaku & Udyog P.Ltd.
Meena Pimplapure
A.S. Oka
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court