SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(Bom) 1078

A.S.OKA
Govinda Bhagoji Kamable & others – Appellant
Versus
Sadu Bapu Kamable & others – Respondent


JUDGMENT - OKA ABHAY S. J.:-On the request made by the learned Advocate appearing for the appellants, names of respondents Nos. 4 and 6 are deleted at the risk of the appellants.

2. On 15th June, 2004 notice was issued by this Court for final disposal of the appeal at admission stage. I have accordingly heard Shri Shaikh, Advocate appearing for the appellants and Shri M.L. Patil, Advocate appearing for the respondents Nos. 1-A to 1-H, 2 and 3. The order impugned in this appeal is the order dated 14th September, 1999 by which the appeal preferred by the appellants was dismissed for default. The order passed by the appellant Court reads thus:

"Appellants absent when called. Their Counsel has filed no instruction pursis at Exh. 26. Hence the appeal is dismissed for default of appellants. It be filed."

3. The learned Advocate for the appellants submitted that only because no instruction pursis was filed by the Advocate appearing for the appellants, the appeal was dismissed for default. He submitted that the Advocate appearing for the appellants had not obtained a valid discharge and therefore, merely because no instructions pursis was filed by the Advocate, the Advocate was not absolved o


































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top