Substitute service of notice on respondent nos. 5 and 6 was allowed in a miscellaneous civil application and the matter was disposed of.
Application allowed for substitute service of notice on respondent nos. 5 and 6.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 140 OF 2016
IN
STAMP NUMBER MAIN NO. 579 OF 2015
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. ... Applicant Versus SMT. REMEDIANA BRAGANZA E REBELLO AND 5 ORS., ... Respondents
Mr. Amey Jagdish Sinai Kakodkar,Advocate for the applicant. Mr. C. A. Coutinho, Advocate for the respondent nos. 1 and 2.
Coram:K. L. WADANE, J.
Date:5th February, 2016
P.C.
Heard Mr. Kakodkar, learned counsel appearing for the applicant.
K. L. WADANE, J.
vn
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an application for substitute service of notice on respondents should be allowed.
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
Smt. Remediana Braganza E. Rebello
K. L. Wadane
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
