High Court via single judge dismissed the appeal and stay application for non-prosecution after the appellant failed to appear or file the requisite process fee against respondents 3 and 4.
Appeal and the captioned application dismissed for non-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.
$~17
ANIL KUMAR
..... Appellant
Through: None
versus
LAXMI NAGAR & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. R.S. Deswal, Advocate for R-1 & 2
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER O R D E R
% 08.01.2016
List on 30.10.2015.
The appellant shall remain present in court on the next date of hearing.
The registry has reported that respondent no. 3 & 4 have not been served. On steps being taken, notice shall issue to the said respondents...”
direction issued in that behalf, one last opportunity was given to the appellant to remain present in court on account of the difficulties expressed by his counsel. The learned counsel for the appellant on that date had informed that the reason for absence of the appellant was that he had fallen ill.
2.1 I had further directed that fresh notice be issued to respondent no.3 and 4 on steps being taken.
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J
JANUARY 08, 2016 yg
RFA 431/2015
page 2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the pending appeal and stay application should be dismissed due to non-prosecution by the appellant.
Anil Kumar
Laxmi Nagar
Rajiv Shakdher
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
