A suit was dismissed for want of prosecution as the plaintiff and her advocate were absent on the hearing date after an earlier proceeding was also missed due to absence.
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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY TESTAMENTARY & INTESTATE CIVIL JURISDICTION
SUIT NO. 31 OF 2007 IN
PETITION NO. 336 OF 2007
Smt. Tara Arun Prasad. ... Plaintiff. V/s. Bhimappa Ramling Sakhare. ... Defendant.
None for the Plaintiff. None for the Defendant.
CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.
DATED : 2nd DECEMBER 2009.
P.C. :-
The Plaintiff had engaged an Advocate whose name has been shown on Board but the Vakalatnama is under objection. Both the Plaintiff and her Advocate were absent on earlier occasion. The Suit is placed for dismissal today. It is accordingly dismissed for want of prosecution.
(S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.)
S.C. Dharmaadhikari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
