This court dismissed an application for restoration of a civil application that had been previously defaulted upon, due to the absence of the applicant.
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.
9. CIVIL CAO 99-10.doc
R.M. AMBERKAR
(Private Secretary)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 99 OF 2010 IN CIVIL APPLICATION (L) NO. 328 OF 2009 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL (L) NO 23110 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 460 OF 2008
Vasant Devlal Bhavsar
Versus
Shashikala Vyankatesh Vaishnawa & Ofs. .. Respondents
CORAM : AKIL KURESHI &
S.J. KATHAWALLA, JJ.
DATE : AUGUST 29, 2019.
P.C.:
1. This application is for restoration of Civil Application No.
328 of 2009 which was dismissed for default on 8.1.2010. Since then, the applicant has not taken any effective steps to get the Civil Application No. 328 of 2009 restored. Today when the matter was called out, again no one was present
for the applicant. Hence, the application is dismissed.
[ S.J. KATHAWALLA, J. ] [ AKIL KURESHI, J ]
1 of 1
Vasant Devlal Bhavsar
Shashikala Vyankatesh Vaishnawa & Ors.
Akil Kureshi
S.J. Kathawalla
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court