- 1 - rng IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUMMARY SUIT NO.4441 OF 1993 Union Bank of India .. Plaintiff vs M/s Sidhi Enterprises ... Defendant Mr.S.N.Fadia i/b Mr.N.S.Fadia for Plaintiff ... CORAM: R.V.MORE,J DATED: January 6, 2010 P.C. 1. The above suit is filed under the provisions of order XXXVII Rule 2 of the C.P.C. for recovery of an amount of Rs.6,46,656/-. The writ of summons was issued to the plaintiff on 11.1.1994. However, the plaintiff failed to effect service on the defendant since 1994. The suit was placed for directions on 19.11.2009 when this court passed the following order : Though the suit is pending since the year 1993, the Plaintiff has not taken any action under the provisions of Rule 227 of the Original Side, Rules 1980. The record of the suit does not disclose whether the Defendant has been served or not. The learned counsel for the Plaintiff is unable to make any statement and therefore, seeks time to take instructions from his client. By way of last chance, a week’s time is granted to the Plaintiff. Stand over to 26th November, 2009. - 2 - 3. Mr.Fadia, learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that service on the defendant could not be effected for want of address. Since the plaintiff has not taken any steps to serve the defendant since 1993, I am constrained to dismiss the suit under the provisions of Rule 227 of the Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules, 1980. R.V.More, J - 3 -