Special Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution due to non-appearance of the applicant's counsel, with the applicant having no instruction.
Special Appeal dismissed 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.
PAGE No
CONTD. ORDER.SHEET
CASE No
| DATE | DESCRIPTIONOFTHE ORDER | REMARK |
|---|---|---|
| sA409122 l3n2l22 |
NonefortheApplicant ShriAdamya Bajpai,Advforthe Respondent Onperusaloforderdated30/lll22itreveals thatonlastdateofhearing Counselforthe ApplicantShriAkshat Agrawal,Advhas withdraw himselfsincehehasnoinstruction from theApplicant sideeventhoughthis matter was adjournedsothatiftheapplicants areinterestedtoprosecutethisSA theymay appearbeforethisBenchbuttodayalsono one appeared onbehalftheapplicants. |
|
| Lookingtoregularnonappearanceofthe Applicantsideitseemsthat nowthe applicants havenointeresttoprosecutethis SA further. |
||
| Hencethis SAis beingdismissedforwantof prosecution. (Ram I Patel) Presidin Officer D.R.T,Jabalpur (M.P&C.G) |
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Applicant
Respondent
Ram Patel
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
