This is a one-line order dismissing an arbitration application for want of prosecution. The applicant was present but did not prosecute the application, leading to its dismissal.
Arbitration Application No. 128 of 2014 is 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.
Nitin
951-ARBAP-128-2014
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. 128 OF 2014
Mr. Anil S. Parekh … Applicant Versus Mrs. Rajnigandha @ Rita Singh … Respondent
None for the Applicant
None for the Respondent.
CORAM: S.J. KATHAWALLA, J. DATE: 26th AUGUST, 2014
P.C.:
None for the Applicant. The above Arbitration Application is
therefore dismissed for want of prosecution.
( S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. )
Nitin
Rajnigandha @ Rita Singh
S.J. Kathawalla
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
