Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution due to repeated adjournments and failure of appellant's counsel to appear despite specific court direction.
Interim order, if any, stands vacated. Appeal dismissed.
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. - 6
Case :- SECOND APPEAL No. - 464 of 1998
Appellant :- Shyam Sunder And Others Respondent :- Jamuna Prasad And Others Counsel for Appellant :- Arshad Rizvi,Harish Chandra,R.L. Verma Counsel for Respondent :- Raza Zaheer,I.D.Shukla,S.K.Mehrotra
Hon'ble Rajnish Kumar,J.
Shri Harish Chandra, learned counsel for the appellants is reported to be out of station.
Perusal of order sheet shows that the case is being got repeatedly adjourned on behalf of learned counsel for the appellants by one or the other counsel. On the last date, Shri Arshad Rizvi, learned counsel for the appellants had submitted that he could not contact to the appellant no. 1, therefore, some time may be granted to seek instructions regarding his status and argue. It was also made clear in the order dated 10.09.2024 that the case shall not be adjourned on the next date on any ground.
The case is of the year 1998.
In view of above, the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.
Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
Order Date :- 25.9.2024 Raj
Digitally signed by :- RAJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Shyam Sunder And Others
Jamuna Prasad And Others
Rajnish Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
