M/S Eastern Construction v. Mrs. Bitose Ignatius D'Souze
Case brief
What is this about?
Appeal dismissed due to the appellant's failure to appear on two dates, resulting in the case being 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
908.FA.1038.1997==.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1038 OF 1997 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 973 OF 2003 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1038 OF 1997
M/s. Eastern Construction .. Appellant Vs. Mrs. Bitose Ignatius D'Souza .. Respondent
None for appellant.
Mr.G.H. Keluskar, Advocate for respondent.
CORAM : A.S. CHANDURKAR, J. DATE : 6TH DECEMBER 2018
P.C.
There was no appearance on behalf of the appellant on 28th November 2018. Today, though the matter is called out twice, none appeared for the appellant. The learned counsel for the respondent is present.
The appeal, therefore, is dismissed for want of prosecution.
(A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)
1/1
Shraddha Talekar PS
M/s. Eastern Construction
Mrs. Bitose Ignatius D'Souza
A.S. Chandurkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court