The Bombay High Court dismissed a commercial appeal as infructuous because the underlying suit was decreed by a concurrent order in the suit, resulting in non-prosecution due to the appellant's absence.
Commercial appeal dismissed as infructuous due to non-prosecution and the decree of the underlying suit.
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.
Urmila Ingale
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
COMMERCIAL APPEAL NO. 119 OF 2017 WITH CHAMBER ORDER (L) NO. 417 OF 2018
Mahesh S.Parekh .. Appellant Vs. New World Resource .. Respondent
None for the Appellant.
Mr.Ranbir Singh a/w Ms.Kripa Jethva i/b Mr.Manish Upadhye, for Respondent.
CORAM : NARESH H.PATIL & G.S.KULKARNI JJ. DATE : 11th JULY 2018
P.C. :
Learned Counsel for the respondent has placed on
record copy of the order dated 05/04/2018 (Coram : S.C.Gupte,
J.) passed in Commercial Suit No. 138 of 2015 and submits that
the Appeal is infractuous as its Suit itself is decreed by the said order.
None appears for the appellant.
Dismissed for non-prosecution.
(G.S.KULKARNI, J.) (NARESH H.PATIL, J.)
1/1
Mahesh S.Parekh
New World Resource
NARESH H.PATIL
G.S.KULKARNI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
