Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 55657 (BOM)

SALIM KHAN S/O SHER KHAN , PROPRIETOR/ PARTNER M/S. S.J. GENERAL STORES, BHILAI AND OTHERS v. MURLIDHAR G. KUKREJA S/O GOVIND RAM KUKREJA, PROPRIETOR OF M/S. ANAND TRADERS, NAGPUR AND OTHER

CAF/3478/2023 · 2025-07-15

Shri Abhay J Mantri

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 22caf3478.2023..odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, AT NAGPUR. CIVIL APPLICATION (CAF) NO 3478 OF 2023 IN FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 21472 OF 2023 (Salim Khan s/o Sher Khan and anr Vs. Murlidhar s/o Govind Ram Kukreja and anr) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CORAM : ABHAY J. MANTRI, J. DATED : 15-07-2025. On the second call, none of the applicants/appellants, or their counsel, appeared when called. 2. Ms. Disha C. Kamwani, learned counsel, appears for respondent No. 1. The Name of respondent No. 2 is deleted from the array of respondents. It further appears that on 22.04.2025, nobody appeared for the applicants/appellants; therefore, the matter was adjourned to 29.04.2025. On 29.04.2025, no one was present; therefore, the matter was adjourned to 16.06.2025. Then, on 20.06.2025, none appeared for the appellants; thus, on that day, an order was passed stating that it seems that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal/application. Despite the facts above, the appellants were given one more opportunity, and the matter was scheduled for hearing/dismissal today. 3. Despite the said facts, none appear for the appellants today. Having considered this, it seems that the appellant is not interested in pursuing the appeal/application. 4. The application /appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. Civil application/s, if any, are disposed of accordingly. (ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.) Belkhede