IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUMMARY SUIT NO.2390 OF 2004 Deepa Ketan Shah ....Plaintiff V/s. Mrudula J. Bhatia & Anr. ....Defendants Mr.C.A. Shukla i/b Mr.B.S. Chandnani for the Plaintiff. None for the Defendants. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATE : 10TH NOVEMBER, 2009. P.C. :- 1. The suit is based on a bill of exchange drawn and accepted by one Jaisingh Bhatia, husband of Defendant No.1 and the father of Defendant No.2. It is in effect therefore a promissory note. 2. The said bill of exchange was dishonoured by non-payment when presented to the deceased. There is no reply to the Plaintiff’s advocates notice demanding payment. 2. The Defendants have not filed the appearance. The Defendants are absent today. 3. The compilation of the documents filed earlier in the office is tendered. The same is taken on record and marked “A” collectively. 4. There is no defence to the suit. There is nothing on record that militates against the Plaintiff’s claim in suit. 5. In the circumstances, the suit is decreed as prayed. Needless to clarify that the decree is only to the extent of the estate coming to the hands of the Defendants. Refund as per rules.