IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 3345 OF 2007 IN SUIT NO. 4976 OF 2000 V.R.Maheshwari ...... ......Plaintiff. V/s K.G.Rao, Chairman & M/s.Maha Container Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. ...... ......Defendants. Ms.Mamta A. Shah, Adv. for the plaintiff. Mr.S.C.Naidu i/by Mr.B.V.Phadnis, Adv. for the defendant No.2. CORAM: A.P.DESHPANDE, J. 5/6/08 PC: This is a summary suit filed by the plaintiff for recovery of price of goods which according to the plaintiff were supplied to defendant No.3-company. Defendant No.3 denies to have received the goods. An unconditional leave to defend the suit was granted to defendant Nos. 1 and 3. Defendant No.2 remained absent and had been proceeded ex-parte. However the order proceeding ex-parte against defendant No.2 came to be recalled on 29.6.07. Thereafter defendant No.2 filed present notice of motion for rejection of the plaint under order 7 rule 11 of Code of Civil Procedure on account of nondisclosure of cause of action qua defendant No.2. There is nothing on record to indicate that defendant No.2 is personally liable. 1 The learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff does not oppose the notice of motion and concedes that the plaint be rejected as against defendant No.2. In view of the concession made available by learned counsel for the plaintiff the plaint stands rejected for want of cause of action against defendant No.2. Relief claimed in prayer (a) of the Notice of Motion is made absolute and prayer (b) is not pressed. Hence rejected as such. Notice of Motion stands disposed of accordingly. 5.6.08 2