Second appeal dismissed for want of prosecution as appellants and their counsel failed to appear on repeated calls.
Appeal 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.
SMITAJOHNSON Digitally signed by SMITAJOHNSON GONSALVESDate: 2024.02.05 GONSALVES 13:56:13 +0530
218.sa.295-03.doc
sg
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
SECOND APPEAL NO.295 OF 2003 WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.442 OF 2003
Keshav Maruti Patil & Anr.
...Appellants
vs. Maruti Raghu Sutar & Others ...Respondents
None for the Appellants.
None for the Respondents.
CORAM : R.N. LADDHA, J.
DATE : 2 FEBRUARY 2024
P.C. :
. Earlier also none appeared for the appellants and, therefore, the matter is placed on today’s board, under the caption ‘For Dismissal’.
(R.N. LADDHA, J.)
1 / 1
Keshav Maruti Patil & Anr.
Maruti Raghu Sutar & Others
R.N. Laddha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court