Cethar Ltd. v. M.V. Le Tong and 2 Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
This interim application allowed the condonation of delay and set aside an order dismissing an admiralty suit for want of prosecution, restoring the suit upon payment of costs.
What did the court decide?
Condoned 177 days delay, set aside the dismissal order, and restored the suit to file subject to payment of Rs. 1,00,000 costs.
What the court decided
11-ia-198-2020.doc
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.198 OF 2020 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.199 OF 2020 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.200 OF 2020 IN ADMIRALTY SUIT NO.13 OF 2011
Cethar Limited ...Applicant/ Plaintiff vs. MV. Le Tong and Others ...Defendants
Mr R. Subramanian, for the Applicant/Plaintiff Mr. Abhimanyu Singh i/b. Mr. V. Subramanian, for Defendant No. 1. Ms. Priyanka Patel, for Defendant No. 3.
CORAM : N. J. JAMADAR, J. DATE : DECEMBER 01, 2022
P.C.:
- The applicant/plaintiff has taken out the Interim Applications
No. 198 and 199 of 2020 for condonation of delay of 177 days in filing the application to set aside the order dated 14th June, 2019 whereby the suit came to be dismissed for want of prosecution and to set aside the said order and restore the suit to file.
- In the applications, it is averred that on account of the confusion which arose over the alleged non-acceptance of Vakalatnama, the then advocate for the plaintiff could not appear before the Court when the suit was listed before the Court and Vishal Parekar, P.A. ...1
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the delay in filing the application to set aside the order dismissing the suit for want of prosecution should be condoned.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Cethar Limited
- respondent
MV. Le Tong
Coram
N. J. Jamadar
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court