Allowed

M/S K. Patel and Co. v. Vallabhadas Jethabhai

Bombay HC3 Feb 2009NMS/134/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This short order restored a suit that had remained on file for 25 years. The learned single judge granted one last opportunity to plaintiffs who engaged new counsel, making the notice of motion absolute subject to payment of costs.

What did the court decide?

Notice of motion made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). Plaintiffs to pay costs of Rs.10,000/- to Defendant No.2 within two weeks.

M/S K. Patel and Co. Vs Vallabhadas Jethabhai — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2009)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

NOTICE OF MOTION NO.134 OF 2009
IN
SUIT NO.327 OF 1984

¶5

M/s.K.Patel & Co. & Ors... Plaintiffs
Versus

¶6

Vallabhdas Jethabhai & Ors... Defendants

¶7

Mr.Munshi i/b. M/s.R.Ginwala for plaintiffs
Mr.Amit Shroff for defendant No.2.

¶8

CORAM :S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.
DATE:3rd February 2009.

¶9

P.C.

¶10

.Plaintiffs have moved this notice of
motion for restoration of the suit.

¶11

2.The affidavit in support is filed by
plaintiff Nos. 3 and 4 and while inviting my
attention to the statements therein, Mr.Munshi
states that he would now take necessary steps and
if the other plaintiffs are not cooperating in

¶12

¶13

the proceeding with the suit, then, they may be
impleaded as defendants or dropped from the
proceedings.

¶14

3.Subject to this, I have heard Mr.Munshi
for plaintiffs and the learned Advocate for
defendant No.2.

¶15

3.Having perused the notice of motion, in
my view, although the suit has remained on the
file of this Court for nearly 25 years and no
steps were taken, one last opportunity deserves
to be granted to the plaintiffs. More so, when
they have now engaged another Advocate and are
now assuring the Court that prompt steps will be
taken at their end to prosecute the suit. Notice
of motion is, therefore, made absolute in terms
of prayer clause (a) subject to plaintiff’s
paying cost quantified at Rs.10,000/- to the
defendant No.2. Costs condition precedent. To
be tendered within two weeks from today.

¶16

¶17

(S.C.Dharmadhikari, J)

M/S K. Patel and Co. v. Vallabhadas Jethabhai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S K. Patel and Co. v. Vallabhadas Jethabhai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S.Kapurchand and Co. Vs Shri Tirumala ENTERPRISESand Ors.

Nupran Trade and Investment Pvt. Ltd. Vs Hico Products Ltd. and Anr.

Rashtriya Chemicals and Fertilzers Ltd. Vs Maratha Mandir Co-Operative Bank Ltd. and Ors.

Hinduja Tmt Ltd. Vs Benham Securities Pvt. Ltd.

M/S. Detergent India Ltd. and Anr. Vs M/S. Sunil Transport

Colgate Palmolive (I) Ltdand Ors. Vs Gujarat Roadlines.