The court dismissed a suit for want of prosecution as the plaintiff remained absent for four consecutive hearings including inspection of the notice of motion.
Suit 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.
1
21.s.3156.2010.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
SUIT NO. 3156 OF 2010
Amit H. Zaveri .. Plaintiff Vs. Subhash Arora Investment Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. .. Defendants
None for plaintiff.
Ms.Juhi Mathur i/b Wadia Ghandy & Co. for defendant nos.1, 2 & 4.
CORAM : K.R.SHRIRAM, J. DATED : 9TH OCTOBER, 2015
P.C.
1 Nobody was present for the plaintiff on the earlier occasion, i.e., on 25.11.2014, when the plaintiff's notice of motion was listed. Even at this stage, nobody has appeared for the plaintiff. In fact, in the order dated 25.11.2014, it is recorded that on three occasions earlier, the plaintiff had remained absent and the notice of motion came to be dismissed.
(K.R. SHRIRAM, J.)
1/2
Shraddha Talekar PA
2
21.s.3156.2010.doc
CERTIFICATE
Certified to be true and correct copy of the original signed
order/judgment.
2/2
Shraddha Talekar PA
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a suit proceeds when the plaintiff remains absent for four consecutive hearings.
Amit H. Zaveri
Subhash Arora Investment Pvt. Ltd.
K.R. Shriram
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
