IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1282 OF 2003 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1282 OF 2003 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1282 OF 2003 IN IN IN SUIT NO.1193 OF 2003 SUIT NO.1193 OF 2003 SUIT NO.1193 OF 2003 Sanjay Tulsidias Rukhana ...Plaintiff Vs. Feroza Momood Khan ...Defendant ----- Mr.Ashok Varma i/b. Mayur Narendra & Co. for Plaintiff CORAM: SMT.R.S.DALVI,J. CORAM: SMT.R.S.DALVI,J. CORAM: SMT.R.S.DALVI,J. DATED: 7TH JULY, 2005 DATED: 7TH JULY, 2005 DATED: 7TH JULY, 2005 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. The Plaintiff has been granted ad-interim 1. The Plaintiff has been granted ad-interim 1. The Plaintiff has been granted ad-interim relief restraining the creation of third party rights relief restraining the creation of third party rights relief restraining the creation of third party rights by the defendants on 24th April, 2003. The plaintiff by the defendants on 24th April, 2003. The plaintiff by the defendants on 24th April, 2003. The plaintiff was directed to file affidavit of service on the next was directed to file affidavit of service on the next was directed to file affidavit of service on the next date. Affidavit of service of the application for date. Affidavit of service of the application for date. Affidavit of service of the application for ad-interim relief was filed. The Plaintiff’s ad-interim relief was filed. The Plaintiff’s ad-interim relief was filed. The Plaintiff’s Advocates states that the Plaintiff was directed to Advocates states that the Plaintiff was directed to Advocates states that the Plaintiff was directed to serve the Notice of Motion through the Sheriff. The serve the Notice of Motion through the Sheriff. The serve the Notice of Motion through the Sheriff. The Notice of Motion has not been served. The Notice of Notice of Motion has not been served. The Notice of Notice of Motion has not been served. The Notice of Motion requires service. The Plaintiff has not shown, Motion requires service. The Plaintiff has not shown, Motion requires service. The Plaintiff has not shown, when the Plaintiff applied to the Sheriff for when the Plaintiff applied to the Sheriff for when the Plaintiff applied to the Sheriff for effecting the service. The ad-interim order was effecting the service. The ad-interim order was effecting the service. The ad-interim order was granted in the absence of the Defendant. The Notice granted in the absence of the Defendant. The Notice granted in the absence of the Defendant. The Notice of Motion not being served, the Defendant is yet of Motion not being served, the Defendant is yet of Motion not being served, the Defendant is yet absent. The Notice of Motion is taken out since 16th absent. The Notice of Motion is taken out since 16th absent. The Notice of Motion is taken out since 16th April, 2003. It should have been served long-ago. April, 2003. It should have been served long-ago. April, 2003. It should have been served long-ago. 2. The Plaintiff’s Advocate applies for three 2. The Plaintiff’s Advocate applies for three 2. The Plaintiff’s Advocate applies for three weeks time for service. This itself shows that the weeks time for service. This itself shows that the weeks time for service. This itself shows that the Plaintiff has no urgency to obtain interim reliefs. Plaintiff has no urgency to obtain interim reliefs. Plaintiff has no urgency to obtain interim reliefs. 3. Notice of Motion is dismissed for want of 3. Notice of Motion is dismissed for want of 3. Notice of Motion is dismissed for want of service. service. service. (SMT.R.S.DALVI,J.) (SMT.R.S.DALVI,J.) (SMT.R.S.DALVI,J.)