- 1 - IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION. ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION. ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION. jmi SUIT NO.237 OF 1990. Durgesh Anant Mankikar. ..Plaintiff. vs. B. Vijay & Co. & Ors. ..Defendants. .... Mr.A.M. Vernekar, for Plaintiff. None for Defendants. .... CORAM CORAM CORAM: S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. DATE DATE DATE : 16TH MARCH, 2009 : 16TH MARCH, 2009 : 16TH MARCH, 2009. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . This suit had appeared before this Court on 4th February 2009 and 24th February 2009 for directions when the learned Advocate for the plaintiff has sought time on the ground that the plaintiff has expired and that the learned Advocate will try to contact his legal heirs. 2. Today, when the suit is called out for directions, the learned Advocate for the plaintiff has pointed out to this Court that he had written a letter on 21st February 2009 to the legal heirs of the deceased plaintiff at the last known address of the plaintiff, informing them that the son of the plaintiff had visited the said Advocates long time back and had informed the Advocate about the demise of the plaintiff. It is further recorded that the Advocate had asked the son of - 2 - the deceased plaintiff to provide the names of the legal heirs of the plaintiff to enable him to take appropriate action in the pending suit. The son of the deceased plaintiff had informed the plaintiff’s Advocate that he would be forwarding the same to them. 3. The learned Advocate has submitted that despite almost one and half years having been elapsed after the visit of the son of the deceased plaintiff, the learned Advocate for the plaintiff is not provided with the names of the legal heirs of the deceased plaintiff nor he has received any instructions from the son of the deceased plaintiff or from any other heirs of the deceased plaintiff. 4. A letter addressed by the Advocate for the plaintiff to the heirs of the deceased plaintiff dated 21st February 2009 has also returned back with an endorsement "Not claimed R to S-7/3/09", which is taken on record and marked ‘X’ for identification. 5. In view of the above, it is clear that the heirs of the deceased plaintiff are not interested in prosecuting the suit and have allowed the suit to abate. 6. The suit is therefore dismissed as abated. - 3 - [S.J.KATHAWALLA, [S.J.KATHAWALLA, [S.J.KATHAWALLA, J.] J.] J.]