The High Court dismissed the second appeal for want of prosecution. The appellant was absent at the hearing, and the court exercised its discretion to dismiss the appeal due to lack of representation.
Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution.
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.
' Si ngYe Bench (Civil) IN THE}: HGHI COURT 017‘ E?” YA Pat: h A” JsyaALpUR Second A13peal No. ‘6);$4 O'E 1994 ,‘% m
Aopellan t: EEnayat Hainusg :snc of Ali Dfdteenan ‘ yusuf p in “, Ca t—e ah o a E-iéu5lman and ”IIIQEg'JQgg!’£Qlm'/I'II‘ ‘ rea‘ident o r 3ahoa13ara$ , ’t, near Bohora W easj c Kphaarganj, E3ilapur, Tahsil and District Eilaspur. VSSErU Plitiffans:ronf1ntsKl.oa‘ez Humaina Bai, ag3 ed 35 years; ‘ ‘ daughter of Yusufi Ali, wife of Abbas 31;& W. f‘fs.Jurbaedtbei,ag 70 year's, I u}? widwo o£ A‘bdu l Hu s saivn ; Bhat Bahora Mu Salnma and renssidet of Ixapga,Bhila’spur,'hacnj ' ‘ ‘ \V Tcgahil’ and Dirigtc: Bipur,M.Dla3 SLCOBD APD&ARLUNDE 5‘-C“‘ION 10 0 PD“1 O OF W(WH— PRQEgDURE ‘ '
SB. Hon’ble Shri Justiue Ptashant Kumar Mishra $913.20“).
None for the appeiEant. The matte! was passed 0v ar nnce in ihe absence ai coume! m? ih=e appellant.
There was no appearance an behalf; 9f ${he appet!ant even m ‘aL me secmd aail £0 mess ghis appe En View of me fact that there is ne {epreeentation an behaif ef ‘th {he appenam, this Ceurt is left m no ether optien, but t0 eismies ma appeat far want of proseautio R. Ammdingiy, the appea! is dismissed fer want 9f eyesecution. SdlPrashantKumarMishra ii ’ Judge
[@éfiae
Enayat Hainus
Khatua Humaina Bai
Bhat Bahora Musalmania
Prashant Kumar Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
