M/s.M.R. Maheshwari v. Himmatlal J. Ajmera & Ors.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 O. 8 r. 10
Judgment
M/s.M.R. Maheshwari .. Plaintiff versus Himmatlal J. Ajmera &Ors. .. Defendants ... Mr.P.N. Ganwani i/b S.N. Shah for the plaintiff. None present for the defendants. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATED : 23rd June 2006. DATED : 23rd June 2006. DATED : 23rd June 2006. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.:
#1. Heard learned counsel for the plaintiff. None present for the defendants. Counsel for the plaintiff points out that the defendants have not filed written statement and prays for a decree under Order 8 Rule 10 of the CPC.
#2. Suit is a simple money suit. The defendants have not filed written statement. Therefore, averments made in the plaint are deemed to be admitted. Suit of the plaintiff is decreed under Order 8 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure in terms of the prayer clause. (D.G. KARNIK, J) (D.G. KARNIK, J) (D.G. KARNIK, J) .. Plaintiff versus .. Defendants ... Mr. Mr. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATED : 23rd June 2006. DATED : 23rd June 2006. DATED : 23rd June 2006. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.:
#1. Heard learned counsel for the plaintiff. None present for the defendant. Counsel for the plaintiff points out that the defendans have not filed written statement and prays for a decree under Order 8 RUle 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
#2. Suit is a simple money suit. The defendants have not filed written statement. Therefore the averments made inthe plaint are deemed to be accepted. Suit of the plaintiff is decreed under Order 8 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure in terms of the prayer clause. (D.G. KARNIK, J) (D.G. KARNIK, J) (D.G. KARNIK, J)
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — O. 8 r. 10.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 23 Jun 2006. The bench was D G KARNIK.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.