The Court dismissed a summary suit filed in 1998 due to manifest neglect and failure by the plaintiff to comply with procedural rules and take steps for summons to judgment.
The suit is dismissed under Rule 227 of the High Court Original Side Rules due to manifest neglect.
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.
SUMMARY SUIT NO. 4809 OF 1998
Uma Investment. Vs. Ghanshyam Singh. .... None for the Plaintiff. None for the Defendants.
...Plaintiff.
...Defendant.
CORAM : DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J.
August 12, 2009 .
P.C.
The Summary Suit under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure was filed in 1998. No steps have been taken for taking out the Summons for Judgment. Accordingly, the suit has been set down for dismissal under Rule 227 of the High Court Original Side Rules and was notified on the notice board of the Prothonotary & Senior Master on 13th July 2009. There is a manifest neglect and failure on the part of the Plaintiff to comply with the provisions of Chapter XIV of the Rules. In the circumstances, the suit is dismissed under Rule 227 of the High Court Original Side Rules.
1 issue framed by the court
whether a summary suit can be dismissed for manifest neglect, failure to comply with rules, and non-appearance.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Uma Investment
Ghanshyam Singh
DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
