In Suit No. 645 of 1987, the plaintiff sought leave to withdraw the suit. The single-judge Bench granted permission to withdraw, with court fees to be refunded as per rules and any interim relief vacated.
Leave withdrawn; court fees refundable per rules; interim relief if any, vacated.
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-S-645-87.DOC
Shephali
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
SUIT NO. 645 OF 1987
Satish Dahyalal Chokshi.…Plaintiff
Versus
Algemene Bank Netherland.…Defendants
Mr. Neville Mukharjee i/b M/s. Wadia Ghandy & Co. for the
Plaintiff.
Mr. Tushar Bhavsar i/b M/s. Crawford Bayley & Co. for the Defendants.CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J DATED: MARCH 18, 2014`
PC:-
1.Mr. Mukharjee, learned Advocate for the plaintiff states that
a vakalatnama will now be filed by M/s. Wadia Ghandy & Co. for
the plaintiff, as M/s. Kanga & Co. have withdrawn their
appearance.
2.Learned Advocate for the plaintiff seeks leave to withdraw
the suit. Suit allowed to be withdrawn. Refund of court fees, if any,
as per rules. Interim / ad-interim relief, if any, granted earlier in any
interlocutory proceedings in this suit, shall stand vacated forthwith.
1 of 2
1-S-645-87.DOC
3. All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this order.
4. Vakalatnama to be filed during the course of today.
(G. S. PATEL, J.)
2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether leave to withdraw a suit in Suit No. 645 of 1987 should be granted.
G.S. Patel
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court