In a Notice of Motion regarding impleadment in Suit No. 2959 of 2005, the Bombay High Court dismissed the motion for want of prosecution after the applicants failed to appear on two occasions.
Notice of Motion 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.
1/1
46-nms-1899-2016 s-2959-2005.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1899 OF 2016 IN SUIT NO. 2959 OF 2005
Sardarni Prem Kaur Bhasin & Ors. .. Applicants
(Proposed Defendants)
In the matter between :
Mrs. Meena Akhtar Rizvi .. Plaintiff Vs. Birender Singh S/o. Sardar Mahal Singh & Ors. .. Defendants
None for applicants.
Mr.Akash Rebello a/w. Mr. Mahesh Mishra i/b Ravi Thankaian for plaintiff. Mrs. Leena Shah i/b M/s. Shah and Furia Associates for defendant Nos.2, 6 and 7.
CORAM : N.J. JAMADAR, J. DATE : 11TH NOVEMBER 2019
P.C.
1. This court, by order dated 14th January 2019, passed the
following order :
“1. None for the Applicants. The Notice of Motion itself ought to have been filed as a Chamber Summons since it seeks impleadment. Since there is discrepancy in the board listing today, I am not dismissing the Notice of Motion; but if on the next occasion none appears for the Applicants, it will be dismissed.”
2. Today also, none appeared for the applicants.
3. The notice of motion stands dismissed for want of
prosecution.
4. The suit be listed on 6th January 2020.
[ N.J. JAMADAR, J. ]
Shraddha Talekar PS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to dismiss a Notice of Motion for want of prosecution when no applicant appeared?
Sardarni Prem Kaur Bhasin & Ors.
N.J. Jamdar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
