Sunil Kumar v. Suraj Kumar
Case brief
What is this about?
This short order dismisses a criminal revision petition for non-prosecuation due to the petitioner's failure to serve the respondent, make necessary deposits, or provide reasons for delay despite prior warnings.
What did the court decide?
Petition and pending application dismissed for non-prosecution. Conditional stay vacated.
What the court decided
$~3
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
- C.R.P. 148/2016 and CM No. 33611/2016 (for condonation of delay) SUNIL KUMAR ..... Petitioner
Through: Petitioner in person.
versus
SURAJ KUMAR ..... Respondent
Through: None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA O R D E R
% 17.05.2018
The petitioner present in person seeks an adjournment on the ground that his counsel is not available. No steps have been taken for the service of notice on the respondent. On being asked for the reasons, the petitioner shows ignorance.
A conditional order of stay against execution was granted on the last date. On being asked, the petitioner submits that he has not made any deposit in compliance.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petition should be dismissed for non-prosecuation due to persistent lapses in service and lack of compliance with stay conditions
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
SUNIL KUMAR
- respondent
SURAJ KUMAR
Coram
R.K.GAUBA
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court