1 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 SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT NO.280 OF 2000 IN SUM. SUIT NO. 6312 OF 1999 Chandra Narottamdas Bahirwani .. Plaintiff vs. Romy Packaging P.Ltd., & Ors. .. Defendants. Ms. Kavita S. Lalwani for plaintiff. None for defendants. CORAM : S.U.KAMDAR, J. CORAM : S.U.KAMDAR, J. CORAM : S.U.KAMDAR, J. DATE : 5th September, 2005. DATE : 5th September, 2005. DATE : 5th September, 2005. P.C. . The present suit is filed on bill of exchange of Rs. 75,000/-. The demand notice was issued. There was no reply. Defendants are served with the writ of summons. Defendants have filed Vakalatnama and, therefore, the present summons for judgment is taken out. On the last occasion when the matter was on board, none appeared on behalf of the defendants and, therefore, I directed the plaintiff’s advocate to issue notice to the advocate 2 for the defendants. However, when notice is tendered to the advocate for the defendant he has refused to accept the service and affidavit of service dated 5.9.2005 is field by the plaintiff. The same is taken on record. List of original documents including the bill of exchange is taken on record and marked Exhibit P-1 collectively. There is no reply to the summons for judgment. In that view of the matter there is no defence. The summons for judgment is made absolute. Suit is decreed accordingly. Decree as prayed.