Rajesh Padmanabhan v. Suresh Ramaswamy Iyer And 7 ORS

Nitin 1 / 2 949-S-312-2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT NO. 312 OF 2013 Rajesh Padmanabhan ...

Plaintiff

Versus

Suresh Ramaswamy Iyer and Ors.

...

Defendants Mr. G.A. Pursuthanan i/b. Legaleye Associates for the Plaintiff. None for the Defendants.

CORAM : S.J. KATHAWALLA, J.

DATED : 2 ND FEBRUARY, 2016 P.C. :

1.

In the above Suit, by an order dated 23 rd November, 2015 issues were framed and the Plaintiff was directed to file his Affidavit of Evidence, Affidavit of Documents and Compilation of Documents on or before 19th December, 2015. The matter was adjourned to 21 st December, 2015 for directions. The Plaintiff failed to comply with the said order dated 23 rd November, 2015, on or before 19 th December, 2015. Even even on 6 th January, 2016 when the above Suit was called out for directions the Advocate appearing for the Plaintiff informed the Court that the Plaintiff has till date not complied with the order dated 23 rd November, 2015. In view thereof, on 6 th January, 2016 this Court passed the following order : "1.The Plaintiff has filed the above Suit inter alia for a declaration that pursuant to the Gift Deed dated 9 th July, 2000 the Plaintiff is the exclusive owner of the Suit flat.

2. By an order dated 23 rd November, 2015 the issues were framed in the above Suit and the Plaintiff was directed to file his Affidavit of Evidence, Affidavit of Documents and Compilation of Documents on or before 19th

Nitin 2 / 2 949-S-312-2013 December, 2015. The Plaintiff has till date not complied with the order dated 23 rd November, 2015. The Suit therefore deserves to be dismissed. However, as a last chance and only by way of indulgence, time is granted upto 13 th January, 2016 to the Plaintiff to comply with the order dated 23 rd November, 2015.

3. Stand over to 13 th January, 2016 under the caption 'First on Board.

'

2.

The Plaintiff again failed and neglected to comply with the said order dated 23 rd November, 2015 on or before 13 th January, 2016. In fact, today i.e. on 2 nd February, 2016, when the above Suit is taken up for directions, the Advocate for the Plaintiff states that the Plaintiff has again not complied with the order dated 23 rd November, 2015. In view thereof, the Court is constrained to dismiss the Suit for want of prosecution.

( S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. )