:1: IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT SUIT SUIT NO. 102 OF 1984 NO. 102 OF 1984 NO. 102 OF 1984 Egyptian International Shipping Company (SAE). ...Plaintiffs. V/s. Pent Ocean Steamship Pvt. Ltd. ... Defendants. Mr. Rahul Mascarenhas i/b. Mulla & Mulla for the Plaintiffs. None for the Defendants. ..... CORAM CORAM CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. 1ST 1ST 1ST DECEMBER 2008. DECEMBER 2008. DECEMBER 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : . The matter appeared before me on 14th October 2008. On that day I invited the attention of the Plaintiffs’ Advocate to the fact that none is appearing for the Defendants and no Written Statement is also filed despite the writ of summons being served upon the Defendants. The learned Advocate appearing for the Plaintiffs stated that he has no instructions and prayed for an adjournment. On 14th October 2008 the matter was adjourned to 11th November 2008 at the Plaintiffs request. On 11th November 2008, the Plaintiffs’ Advocate stated that the Plaintiffs are desirous of obtaining ex-parte decree and at their request the matter is placed today under that caption. However in a Suit filed in the year 1984, till this date, the Plaintiffs’ Advocate are unable to obtain any instructions from the Plaintiffs. There are no original :2: documents filed nor any compliance is made with the procedure for seeking a decree for want of written statement. Repeatedly, the matter cannot be adjourned. 2. In such circumstances, the Suit is dismissed for want of prosecution. (S.C. (S.C. (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.) DHARMADHIKARI,J.) DHARMADHIKARI,J.)