M.R.Agarwal v. Oriental Bank of Commerce
Case brief
What is this about?
The judgment dismisses a writ petition by default due to the petitioner's failure to appear on the date of hearing.
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.
$~16
M.R.AGARWAL ..... Petitioner Through: None
versus
ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Jagat Arora and Mr.Rajat Arora, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR
O R D E R
Matter has been passed over once. There is no appearance on behalf of the petitioner even on the second call.
There was no appearance on behalf of the petitioner more than one date of hearing in the past.
Accordingly, petition is dismissed for default and non prosecution.
C.HARI SHANKAR, J
JANUARY 18, 2018 neelam
M.R. Agarwal
Oriental Bank of Commerce
C. Hari Shankar
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court