The High Court of Bombay heard Suit No. 1569 of 1997 for the second time on May 2, 2009. After plaintiffs and counsel were absent both times for an ex parte decree, the court dismissed the suit for want of prosecution.
Suit dismissed for want of 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
O. O. C. J.
SUIT NO.1569 OF 1997
M/s.Emmes Metal Ltd. Vs.
..Plaintiffs.
M/s. Ideal Jawa India Ltd. ..Defendants. ....
None present for the parties.
CORAM: DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.
2nd May, 2009.
P.C. :
On 29th April, 2009 when the suit was called out for an
ex parte decree the Plaintiffs and their advocate were absent. The suit is directed to be placed on Board today under the caption of dismissal to furnish a further opportunity to the Plaintiffs should they be interested in persuing the proceedings. The Plaintiffs and their advocate are again absent. The suit is dismissed for want of prosecution.
M/s. Emmes Metal Ltd.
M/s. Ideal Jawa India Ltd.
Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
