The appellant failed to appear to press a Section 5 Application regarding limitation. The High Court rejected the application for want of prosecution and dismissed the appeal as barred by limitation.
The appeal was dismissed as barred by limitation.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 16
Case :- SECOND APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 174 of 2012
Appellant :- Ravi Kumar Respondent :- Nathu Since Deceased And Others Counsel for Appellant :- Sumati Rani Gupta,Arvind Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- T.A. Khan
Hon'ble Rajiv Joshi,J.
List has been revised.
None appears on behalf of the appellant to press the Section 5 Application.
The application is, accordingly, rejected for want of prosecution.
Consequently, the appeal is dismissed as barred by limitation.
Order Date :- 30.1.2019
Noman
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appeal was barred by limitation.
What was the outcome of the Section 5 Application filed by the appellant.
Ravi Kumar
Nathu Since Deceased And Others
Rajiv Joshi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
