Bharat Bansal v. Ram Karan
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court dismissed the appellant's appeal from an order dated 1992 due to the appellant's absence for a period of 29 years, invoking rule on limitation.
What did the court decide?
None granted. Appeal dismissed under Chapter 12 Rule 4 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952.
What the court decided
Court No. - 21
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 298 of 1992
Appellant :- Bharat Bansal Respondent :- Ram Karan Counsel for Appellant :- K.L. Grover
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.
This is an appeal of the year 1992.
It is stated that Shri K.L. Grover is no more.
Appellant has absented himself for a period of 29 years.
After waiting of 29 years, I have no other option but to dismiss the appeal.
In view of the above, this appeal stands dismissed under Chapter 12 Rule 4 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952.
Order Date :- 9.12.2021 A.N. Mishra
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appeal filed nearly 29 years after the original order should be allowed considering the appellant's prolonged absence.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Bharat Bansal
- respondent
Ram Karan
Coram
Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · December
- Registered
- Case no.
- FAFO/298/1992
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court