The High Court of Bombay allowed the Plaintiffs to withdraw the filed summary suits against Defendant No. 2. The suits against that defendant were disposed of as withdrawn with no costs awarded.
Withdrawal of suits against Defendant No. 2 allowed; suits disposed of as withdrawn; no costs; refund of court fees.
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
SUMMARY SUIT NO. 2058 OF 1998 WITH SUIT NO. 1962 OF 1998 WITH SUIT NO. 1963 OF 1998 WITH SUIT NO. 1964 OF 1998 WITH SUMMARY SUIT NO. 1965 OF 1998 WITH SUIT NO. 1995 OF 1998 WITH SUIT NO. 1998 OF 1998 WITH SUMMARY SUIT NO. 2059 OF 1998
Nupran Trade and Investment Pvt. Ltd.
... Plaintiff.
V/s.
Hico Products Ltd. & Anr.
... Defendants.
Mr. K.R. Parekh for the Plaintiff. Ms. Renuka Lele i/b. Haresh Mehta & Co. for Defendant 2.
CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.
02ND FEBRUARY 2009.
P.C. :
Mr. Parekh, learned Advocate appearing for the
| . | . | , | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiffs | sta | tes | that aft |
er the |
Suit |
was |
decreed | against |
| Defendant | No. | 1, | the ma |
tter | was | considered | by | the |
| Plaintiffs | and | they | have |
now | taken | a decision |
to |
withdraw |
| the Suit |
ag | ainst | Defendan | t | No.2. | This | decisio | n is |
| communicated instructions to |
to Mr. withdraw |
Parekh the Suit |
and he has against Defend |
received ant No.2. |
:2:
(S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.)
S.C. DHARMADHIKARI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
