The court dismissed an appeal filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The appellant personally made an appearance but offered no representation on merits, resulting in dismissal.
The appeal is dismissed due to default of the appellant in making representation on behalf of the appellant at hearing on appointment.
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.
THE HIGM COURT OP JTJDICATUR'i C"T-%TTISGARH AT PTLASPUR F.A.NO. [^ /2004
APPET.LA MT
SUrendrs Kunar
'
'T'DEFENDXNT )
S/o Nangal prasad.
Aged afcoat 35 years,
R/o 'Haldl Badi' Chiriniri.
^^ fahsil Manendragsrh
District-Koria (CG).
^^^y ^e!1.--"""...•••
^" ^'•SRSVS
i^S-^^:^gr
^n5£A r''r!:'F5RFSP'~'NDENT
Suresh Kumar patel S/o Ls'te C^^'ota Rhai patel Aged sbout 50 years, R/o 'Haldi. Badj.' Sbirndrl, •TahRJ.l Manendracfarh Di°trict-T'oria (CG).
FTROT A"PEAL UNDPR SECTION 96 OF T"E COD'R OF CP-TL PROCEDURE
^esm
XI-HC-78
^^-
3^ "i<l-i|lc1i|, ^TTIy'KS, fsldlti^
qiKdl sh"^ich "^ •A '• •'' ^/•^w3^• • • ^ 200
| ^ | 3)1^1 Ma<*i (>id^ | GI^ST) |
|---|---|---|
| 3T=srfeTq? ;raT3T[^Tsbil |
ob | ??HTWtlf?(T3n^T |
| (; . ipm- |
02.03.2007 No one appearsforthe a Shri l-1.5.Patel, Counsel On the last date of he hearing, no one hod appeared f is rno.de, as a resuft, this appeal Even today at 11.40, w appeo.rs for the appelfo.nt and cppeliant. As a consequence default of the appeliant. M.C.P.No.1601/2004 for ofturn hearing a!so stand dispq Certified copy asper rul^ r ^ |
BER
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appeal should be allowed when no representation is made by the appellant at the time of hearing?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Surendra Kumar
Suresh Kumar Patel
Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
