The court dismissed a second appeal for want of prosecution as the appellant was absent on the hearing date.
Second appeal dismissed for want of prosecution.
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. - 53
Case :- SECOND APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 287 of 2019
Appellant :- Neelam And 4 Others Respondent :- Nirmala Devi Counsel for Appellant :- Pradeep Kumar Pal Counsel for Respondent :- Ram Kishore Pandey,Himanshu Raghav Pandey
Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.
List has been revised. No one appears for the appellants.
Shri Himanshu Raghav Pandey, learned counsel for the respondent is present.
This is a defective second appeal in which the court fee is reported to be insufficient and is beyond time by 26 days.
Since no one appears to press the applications, the applications are rejected for want of prosecution and the second appeal stands dismissed.
Order Date :- 19.8.2019 A. V. Singh
(Jayant Banerji, J.)
Neelam and 4 Others
Nirmala Devi
Jayant Banerji
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
