1 mst IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUMMARY SUIT NO.3859 OF 1996 Headway, Home and Law Publishing Group Ltd. Plaintiff versus P. Rajarathinam Defendant Mr.Nikhil Pai i/by Humranwala & Co. for plaintiff. None for the defendant. CORAM : S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. DATE : 21st February 2011 PC : 1. Learned advocate for the plaintiff states that in the year 1998 an attempt was made to serve the writ of summons on the defendant. Thereafter the plaintiff was unable to serve the writ of summons on the defendant who had cleared off his operations in Mumbai and Chennai. Thereafter no steps are taken since the last more than 15 years to serve the writ of summons on the defendant. The learned advocate for the plaintiff submits that despite letters being addressed to their client-the plaintiff seeking instructions to serve the writ of summons by way of substituted service, the plaintiff has not come forward to give any instructions in the matter to them. In view thereof, it is established beyond any doubt that the plaintiff is not interested in prosecuting the suit. The suit is therefore dismissed for want of prosecution. (S.J.KATHAWALLA, J.)