: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. 1588 OF 1984 NO. 1588 OF 1984 NO. 1588 OF 1984 National Textile Corporation Ltd. New Delhi & Anr. ...Plaintiffs. V/s. M/s. D. Sushilkumar & Co. ... Defendants. AND AND AND SUIT SUIT SUIT NO. 1605 OF 1984 NO. 1605 OF 1984 NO. 1605 OF 1984 National Textile Corporation Ltd., New Delhi & Anr. ... Plaintiffs. V/s. M/s. M.M. Textiles. ... Defendants. Ms. Jumana Lokhandwala i/b. Pandya & Poonawala for the Plaintiffs. None for the Defendants. ..... CORAM CORAM CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. 20TH 20TH 20TH NOVEMBER 2008. NOVEMBER 2008. NOVEMBER 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : . This suit is for directions after 24 years of its institution. M/s. Pandya and Poonawala have been representing the Plaintiffs as Advocates. However, today when the matter is called the Advocate states that the Plaintiffs are not giving any instructions. There is nothing pointed out to me including copies of letters addressed to the Plaintiffs requesting for instructions. :2: 2. In such circumstances, a oral request of the Plaintiffs’ Advocate for discharge from the proceedings cannot be granted. The rules prescribed a procedure for the Advocate to be discharged. There is an increasing tendency amongst Advocates to get themselves relieved from proceedings on spacious and convenient grounds of want of instructions, after knowing fully well that the matter is pending in this Court for 24 years. I have noticed that even Written Statements are not filed in some of the Suits by N.T.C. Yet, neither N.T.C. nor the Advocates have bothered to take any steps including applying for ex-parte decree. 3. In these circumstances and when noticing that no steps are taken by the Plaintiffs, the request of the Advocate to be discharged from the proceedings or grant of adjournment is refused. Since the Plaintiffs have not taken any steps to proceed with the matter and appear to be wholly negligent in the conduct of the proceedings, there is no alternative but to dismiss the Suit for want of prosecution. It is accordingly dismissed. (S.C. (S.C. (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.) DHARMADHIKARI,J.) DHARMADHIKARI,J.)