In Second Appeal No. 454 of 1994, the Bombay High Court dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution after noting the non-appearance of the appellants.
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.
sa 454-1994.doc
1/1
sat
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
SECOND APPEAL NO. 454 OF 1994
Pukhraj Rupchand Jain, deceased through his legal heirs Gulabbai Pukhraj Jain & Ors. …Appellants vs. Suman Sadanand Patil & Ors. ...Respondents
None for Appellants. Mr.Dushyant Pagare I/b. Rajesh Datar for Respondents.
CORAM : S.C. GUPTE, J.
6 JANUARY 2017
P.C. :
None for the Appellants. Even on the last two occasions, i.e. on 5 May 2016 and 22 September 2016, none had appeared for the Appellants. The appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.
(S.C. Gupte, J.)
Pukhraj Rupchand Jain, deceased through his legal heirs Gulabbai Pukhraj Jain & Ors.
Suman Sadanand Patil & Ors.
S.C. GUPTE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
