The Single Judge dismissed a company petition for repeated non-compliance of orders regarding advertisement, citing want of prosecution after an eight-year lapse.
The petition was dismissed for want of prosecution due to repeated non-compliance.
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
jpc/-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
COMPANY PETITION NO. 981 OF 2001
M/s Maximus Steel Mfg. Ltd. Versus
M/s Ruby Securities & Finance Pvt. Ltd.
.. Petitioners
.. Respondent
Mr. A.C. Mahimkar for the Petitioner
None for the Respondent
CORAM : S. J. KATHAWALLA, J. DATE : 17th September, 2010
P.C.:
1. By an order of this Court dated 22nd March, 2002 the above Petition was admitted and directed to be advertised. However, the Petitioners failed to comply with the said order and advertise the Petition in the last more than eight years. Despite this, the lapse on the part of the Petitioners was treated as inadvertence and one more opportunity was given to the Petitioners by an order dated 7th July, 2010 to advertise the admission of the Petition within a period of four weeks. Today, I am informed by Mr. Mahimkar that till date the Petitioners have not advertised the admission of the petition.
2. In view thereof, this Court is constrained to dismiss the Petition for repeated non compliance of the orders passed by this Court and for want of prosecution.
M/s Maximus Steel Mfg. Ltd.
M/s Ruby Securities & Finance Pvt. Ltd.
S. J. Kathawalla
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
