Dismissed
Ulhasnagar Municipal Corporation v. Amrutlal Narsinghani and Anr.
Bombay HCWP/4245/2000
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY…
What the court decided
AI extract
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.
wp4245-00.doc
sg
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.4245 OF 2000
Ulhasnagar Municipal Corporation vs Amrutlal Narsinghani and Anr.
...Petitioner
...Respondents
Mr. Metkari, AGP, for Respondent No.2.
CORAM : S.C. GUPTE, J.
DATED: MAY 3, 2016
P.C. :
. None for the Petitioner. Even on the last occasion, i.e. on 21 April 2016, none had appeared for the Petitioner and the petition was stood over to today's date. Even before that date, none had appeared for the Petitioner. The office was directed to notify the Petitioner of the order. The office report says that though the service was effected on the Petitioner, there was no record of any acknowledgement as of date. Anyway, it is the duty of the Petitioner to diligently prosecute the petition. It has been adjourned on at least three occasions. There is an attempt made to even issue a court notice to the Petitioner of the next date of hearing, despite of which, the Petitioner is absent. The petition is dismissed, in the premises, for want of prosecution.
( S.C. GUPTE, J. )
Pg 1 of 1
Ulhasnagar Municipal Corporation
Amrutlal Narsinghani
S.C. GUPTE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court