Appeal challenging a trial court order restoring a petition earlier dismissed for non-appearance and non-prosecution. The High Court held the restoration was judiciously done with liberal consideration of the fundamental right to represent one's cause, and dismissed the appeal.
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.
$~3
Through: Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Mr. Rahul Kumar Jain, Advocates.
LALIT SANSANWAL .....Respondent Through: Mr. Vijay Sansanwal, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
J U D G M E N T (oral)
CM APPL. 28362/2024
Signature Not Verified
FAO 118/2024 1
Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:0 6.07.2024 15:42:15
(MANOJ JAIN)
JUDGE
JULY 5, 2024/ K
FAO 118/2024 2
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:0 6.07.2024 15:42:15
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the trial court's restoration of a petition dismissed for non-appearance and non-prosecution, without recorded reasons for non-prosecution, was sustainable?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Rajneesh vs NehaReferred
(2021)2 SCC 324 · Who else cites this
Sunita
Lalit Sansanwal
Manoj Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
