One-judge bench dismissed the second appeal by default due to the appellant's non-appearance after notice, holding the underlying civil suit was not maintainable.
Appeal dismissed in default due to non-appearance; liberty granted.
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.
ssm
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
SECOND APPEAL NO.747 OF 2002
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Office Notes, Office Memoranda
of Coram, appearances, Court’s
Orders or directions and
Registrar’s OrdersCourt’s or Judge’s Orders
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
None present.
CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA,J.
DATED : 29th April, 2008
P.C.
. Though the Court notice
served, none appeared for the
Appellant. Both the courts after
considering the provisions of law
and the record, held that the
Civil Suit is not maintainable.
As none appeared for the
Appellant, the matter stands
dismissed in default with
liberty.
[ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.]
1 issue framed by the court
Whether theappeal should be allowedwhen the appellant failed to appear after service of notice.
Appellant
Office Memoranda
Anoop V. Motta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court