In Second Appeal No. 461 of 1997, the Bombay High Court dismissed the appellant's appeal for want of prosecution as the appellant did not appear before the court.
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.
1/1 202 sa 461.docx
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Second Appeal No. 461 of 1997
... Rajaram Ganu Takle Appellant v/s. Rama Ganu Takle … Respondents
None for the parties.
LATA SUNIL PANJWANI
Digitally signed by LATA SUNIL PANJWANI Date: 2024.01.15 17:23:38 +0530
P.C. :
CORAM : R.N.LADDHA, J. DATE : 15 January 2024
On the last occasion, none appeared for the appellant,
therefore, the matter was placed under the caption ‘for dismissal’.
Today also none present for the appellant. The appeal stands
dismissed for want of prosecution.
R.N. LADDHA, J.
Lata Panjwani, P.S.
Rajaram Ganu Takle
Rama Ganu Takle
R.N. Laddha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court