In Misc. Appeal (C) No. 409 of 2006, the Division Bench of the High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed the appellant's miscellaneous appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act due to want of prosecution, as no representation appeared on behalf of the appellant.
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.
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
DIVISION BENCH
CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI N.K. AGARWAL, J.
Misc. Appeal (C) No. 409 of 2006
Appellant Mohd Shakee! Memon 26 years, s/o Applicant Abdul Sattar, Mahamayapara, Aarang, Raipur
VERSUS
Respondents 1. Abhimanyu Devri, s/o Jageshwar Non-applicants 2. Anil Kumar Tomal, s/o Nagednra Singh Tomar 1-2 r/o Old Ganj Mandi Raipur 3 Oriental Insurance Co Ltd., Branch Office Bargarh, Orissa By Divisional Manager, Kutchery Chowk, Jail Road, Raipur
Misc. Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act.
Present: None for the appellant.
hs.
Shri Sudhir Agrawai and Shri P Dutta, counsel for respondent No.3.
ORDER ith (04tnAugust,2011)
The following order of the Court was passed by
Rajeev Gupta, C.J.
None for the appellant.
are left with no other option, but to dismiss the appeal for want of
prosecution.
Sd/-
Sd/-
N. K. Agarwal
ChiefJustice
Judge
nimmi
r
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution given the absence of the appellant's representation?
Mohd Shakee! Memon
Abhimanyu Devri
Anil Kumar Tomal
Oriental Insurance Co Ltd.
Rajeev Gupta
N.K. Agarwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
