Phoola v. B.O.R.
Case brief
What is this about?
Writ petition dismissed for want of prosecution as no one appeared to argue the case. Registrar instructed to accept restoration applications only with receipt of cost deposit.
What did the court decide?
Writ petition dismissed for want of prosecution; cost of Rs. 2,000 to be deposited in High Court Bar Association, Allahabad.
What the court decided
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - B No. - 10074 of 1980
Phoola
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
B.O.R.
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Pankaj Dwivedi, M.C.Agarwal, Sunil Ambwani Counsel for Respondent(s) : S.C., S.C.
Court No. - 5
HON'BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.
- This case is of the year 1980, however, when it was taken up for hearing, no one has appeared to argue it.
- In view of above, this writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution with a cost of Rs. 2,000/- to be deposited in High Court Bar Association, Allahabad, receipt of which shall be placed on record.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Phoola
- respondent
B.O.R.
Coram
Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · September
- Registered
- Case no.
- WRIB/10074/1980
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court