Anirudha Banjari v. Vivekanand Bhivgade
Case brief
What is this about?
The applicant failed to appear for the MCC hearing. The Court dismissed the matter for want of prosecution.
The applicant failed to appear for the MCC hearing. The Court dismissed the matter 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, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
MCC No. 344 of 2021
---- Applicant
Versus
---- Respondents
| 10/04/2024 | None for the Applicant. |
|---|---|
| Shri Anurag Tripathi, Panel Lawyer for the State. No one appears on behalf of the petitioner when the matter was called on behalf of the petitioner nor any representation is made on behalf of the petitioner. Under the circumstances, this Court is left with no other option except to dismiss the MCC for want of prosecution. Accordingly, the MCC is dismissed for want of prosecution. SD/- |
|
| ashu | (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge |
Anirudha Banjari
Vivekanand Bhivgade
State Of Chhattisgarh
Goutam Bhaduri
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court