The High Court of Judicature at Bombay dismissed the summons for judgment due to the plaintiff's non-appearance, directing the defendant to file a written statement and transferring the suit to commercial causes.
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.
kvm
1
SJ367_10
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT NO. 367 OF 2010 IN SUMMARY SUIT NO. 1740 OF 2010
Lalitkumar Premchand Jain ..... Plaintiff VERSUS Rajesh Babulal Parikh ..... Defendant
None for the Plaintiff.
Mr.Shashank N.Fadia for the Defendant.
CORAM : R.D. DHANUKA, J. DATE : 3 rd AUGUST, 2012.
P.C. :
None appeared for the Plaintiff on 27th July, 2012. The matter was therefore placed on Board for dismissal today. Plaintiff as well as his advocate is absent. On 22nd June, 2012 both the parties through their respective advocates made a statement that Defendant has already paid the entire settled amount except a sum of Rs.25,000/-. In view of this fact, Summons for Judgment is dismissed. Defendant is directed to file Written Statement within eight weeks from today. Suit is transferred to the list of commercial causes. Office is directed to place the matter thereafter on Board for framing issues.
[R.D. DHANUKA, J.]
R.D. Dhanuka
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
