Petitioner failed to appear in court. The High Court dismissed the writ petition for want of prosecution. No substantive legal issue was decided.
The writ petition is 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. - 1
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 24129 of 2009
Petitioner :- Dakshinanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited And Others Respondent :- The District Consumer Forum Ii Agra And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- H.P. Dube Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mahendra Tripathi,Ranjit Saxena
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Case called out in the revised list. None appears on behalf of the petitioners to press the writ petition. Sri Amit Kumar Asthana, learned Advocate, holding brief of Sri Ranjit Saxena, learned counsel appearing for the respondents and learned Standing Counsel are present.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.
(Ajit Kumar,J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)
Order Date :- 7.11.2019 NS
Dakshinanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited And Others
The District Consumer Forum Ii Agra And Another
Ramesh Sinha
Ajit Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
