abs IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 244 OF 2008 IN SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT NO. 134 OF 2006 IN SUMMARY SUIT NO. 3263 OF 2005 Chandur Moriani .. Plaintiff V/s Mukesh Sharma .. Defendant None for the Plaintiff. Mr.Ajay Misar for the Defendant. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATE : 21ST JULY 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. : 1. This is a notice of motion for setting aside an exparte decree dated 25th July 2006. By the said order, the learned Judge has furnished reasons why the application for an adjournment was not granted. The Defendant filed Appeal No.44 of 2007. The Division Bench by an order dated 9th January 2007 dismissed the appeal. While dismissing the appeal, the Division Bench - 2 - observed that there was nothing on record to disclose that the Defendant/Appellant was unable to file his appearance within time. Having said so, the Division Bench no doubt observed that the order would not come in the way of the Appellant making the present application for setting aside the decree. 2. I find that in fact no ground has been made out for setting aside the exparte decree. Further, even on merits, there appears nothing to be even considered. The supply of goods has been admitted. The receipt thereof has been admitted. There were no replies to the two notices demanding payment. The mere fact that the suit has been filed by the Defendant after the filing of this suit for recovery of amounts on the ground that the goods supplied were allegedly defective can be of no assistance to the Defendant. 3. In the circumstances, the notice of motion is dismissed.