The Letters Patent Appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution due to the absence of counsel for the appellants. Alongside the appeal, associated civil applications were also disposed of.
Letters Patent Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution; connected civil applications disposed of.
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.
skc
LPA-86-99
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO .
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 86 OF 1999
IN WRIT PETITION NO. 1394 OF 1999 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2867 OF 1999
IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 86 OF 1999 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 87 OF 2006 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 86 OF 1999
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s Orders or directions and Registrar’s orders.
Court’s or Judge’s Orders
None for Appellants. None for Respondent.
CORAM : D. D. SINHA AND
SMT. V. K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ. 21 August 2012
P.C. :
Counsel for the appellants absent. Letters Patent Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution. No order as to costs.
In view of the dismissal of the Letters Patent Appeal, Civil Applications does not survive and same are also disposed of.
(SMT. V. K. TAHILRAMANI, J.)
Chandka
1/1
D. D. SINHA
V. K. TAHILRAMANI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
