: 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 SUIT NO.1629 of 1992 SUIT NO.1629 of 1992 SUIT NO.1629 of 1992 Homi Nasarvanji Jamshedji Dady & Anr. .. Plaintiffs. Versus Philips India Ltd. & Anr. .. Defendants. None for the plaintiffs. None for the defendants. CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. DATE : 16th September, 2008. DATE : 16th September, 2008. DATE : 16th September, 2008. P.C. :- P.C. :- P.C. :- 1. None for the plaintiffs. On the last two occasions, nobody was present on behalf of the plaintiffs. Today also, nobody is present on behalf of the plaintiffs. On 3.7.2008, a statement was made that the plaintiff No.1 has expired. No steps are taken to bring his heirs on record. All this inaction on the part of the plaintiffs would go to show that the plaintiffs are not interested in prosecuting the suit. 2. Suit is, therefore, dismissed for want of prosecution with no order as to costs. (R.Y. GANOO,J.) (R.Y. GANOO,J.) (R.Y. GANOO,J.)