← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/760/1994disposed off

V.D.Keny And ORS. v. Mun. Corpn. Of Gr. Bombay

2017-10-10Hon'Ble Shri Justice R. I. Chagla,Hon'Ble Smt. Justice Vasanti A. Naik2 pages

Sudhir Rane 208-WP761-1994

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.760 OF 1994 V.D. Keny & Ors.

... Petitioners.

Versus

Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay ... Respondents.

....

None for the Petitioner.

Ms. G.R. Shastri, Addl. G.P. for State.

CORAM : Smt.Vasanti A Naik & Riyaz I. Chagla, JJ.

DATE : 10th October, 2017.

P.C. :

Since as per the office note, the papers of the petition were not traceable, we had by an order dated 20.07.2017, directed the advocate for the petitioners to supply the true copies of the pleadings on ledger paper to the Registry along with true copies of the order within two weeks. On the said date of hearing, none had appeared on behalf of the petitioner. The matter was then directed to be listed on the daily board for 04.08.2017 under the caption "Directions". On 04.08.2017, this Court was informed that the advocate for the petitioners is no more. We therefore directed the Prothonotary and Senior Master to publish a notice on the web-site of the High Court, incorporating the number of the writ petition, the names of the parties and advocates, calling upon

Sudhir Rane 208-WP761-1994 the petitioner to furnish the true copies of the pleadings within two weeks from the date on which the notice is published. As per our directions, the notice was published on the website on 22.09.2017, calling upon the petitioner to furnish the true copies of the pleadings within two weeks. In the notice published on the website on 22.09.2017, it was mentioned that if the petitioner fails to furnish the true copies of the pleadings in the writ petition within two weeks, the writ petition would be liable to be dismissed for want of prosecution.

Despite the publishing of the notice on the website on 22.09.2017, the true copies of the pleadings are not furnished by the petitioner. Since the counsel for the petitioner is no more and since the petitioner has not furnished the true copies of the pleadings and the papers of the petition are not traceable, it would not be possible for this Court to decide the writ petition. Hence, we dismiss the writ petition, for want of prosecution. (Riyaz I. Chagla J) (Smt.Vasanti A Naik, J)