Kelha v. Dhuna and Others
Case brief
What is this about?
The court dismissed the second appeal for want of prosecution as the appellant failed to appear for summons despite being called twice.
What did the court decide?
The second appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.
What the court decided
:i£
IN THE HIGH COLJRT OF MADHY^PRADSSH AT JABALPU
S.A. No, of 1990
APPELLANT.
PLAINTiFP la s/o Makhan ^Peli, agsd , about
70 ysars. r/o village- Borda. Tah
an3 District - Raiaarh.
"-
VERSUS
R3SEONDENTS :
:^^yQS-'ENDANTS s - 1, QASiinai, s/o Gansshram Teli, aged
about 76 ysars, r/o Orda..
;'.^-2. Bft^girathi, s/o GaneshramTsli, '"^.
aged about 30 years, r/o village
Midmida.'
3. Shrimati,^ . , s/o Ganeshrar"' "• Teli.• .. • • •
aged about 35 years, r/o Bijawali,
Polics Station- Rengali, District-
'.
Sairibalpur (UP)
<^-'"4. KSrun Kunwar, w/o Gajpati, aged <br>about 40 ysars, r/o village-Orda,
,S "5. N<?nkiTahsil-'\B*ai,~Raigarhv//o. "'Bhupdeo,(M.t>.)- ": ' Teli, • •' ' ?.),'.
Orda,aged' aboutTahsil-35 Raigarhyears, r/o(M.P.)village -
5? 6.: Kartik'kam s/o Mohar Say Teli, ,
Tahsil-aged aboutSarangarh30 years,(M.P.)r/o Gudeli,^ ' : : ; 1 fe
.^' —"7.SarTtram,agsd abouts/o27Mdharysars,Sayr/6Teli,Hardi,! -
Tahsil—Sakti,Distt. BilaspujC. .
8, Satatrain,. s-u 7 .s/o Mohar. Say Tel±,-aged
about 24" years. r/b Hardl,, Sahsi:'l
Sakti, Qlstt. Bilaspur: (M.E.)' I- ,,
,^. .Bha^atrarn^^s/b. Ganeshrami:'I'ga.|3.fc;,;ags<3^
abeut^::50''years,r/o'Qi^a,,:j::a?^a:ii^—i'i:^
:,' •Wa^rft^M.P.)^:. :..::.'.;'^;^
SECQND AE^EAL..tlI®^./S®eTI©S;liO^Oi-^/mEI.GnaB^':^^|S?Ea';^^^^
•Tvi •^w\c[t[. dTfly'id. r««ni'Mi<
l.'
31T^T X(3ra?
_/
.r.A. 1^0-3^^750
HWWI 9iWi 200
'fa^ST'
SIT^iqiT
1?;li??3TI^T 311^1'TOIIWHlta ^iiita4l-Ft ^ii(nf'?T^ldl <Fi)-<-tf:K
^'aifigq 3ii^i
^J-i ylia
S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Justice Prasdant Kumar Mishra
9-3-2010
No one appears for the afjipellant Shri Devendra Patel, couitisel for the respondents.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the second appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution in the absence of the appellant despite summons?
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Shri Devendra Patel
- respondent
Respondents
Coram
Prashant Kumar Mishra
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Chhattisgarh HC
- Decided on
- · March
- Registered
- Case no.
- SA/365/1990
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court