The Court dismissed the matter for want of prosecution as no applicants appeared despite a peremptory order, indicating lack of interest to proceed given the recent settlement.
Matter 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.
coNTD. ORDER.SHEET
PAGE NO
CASE No
| DATE | DESCRIPTIONOFTHE ORDER | RE]YIARK |
|---|---|---|
| SAIOO 14t02t2 |
122 NonefortheApplicant ShriVipulSaraswat,AdvfortheResponden No.l |
|
| Onmatter being takenRespondentCounse apprisedtheBenchthatmatter hasalread been settledbetweenthepartiesandth Applicantshavegiventimetodeposi settlement amountupto25103123. Onperusaloforderdated19101123itreveal thatonlastdateofhearingnoone appearedo behalfoftheApplicants. OnlastdateofhearingthisBenchhaspassed a peremptory orderobservingthatilonnext dateofhearingthatistodayAppticantside remainabsentthenmattershalltLdismissed forwant ofprosecution. Inspiteofperemptoryorder today alsonoone appearedon behalfoftheApplicantstherefore lookingtosettlementitrevealsthatthe Applicantshavenointeresttoprosecr-rtethis matter further. Thereforethismatterisbeingdismissedfor wantofprosecution. Recordbeconsignedtotherecord room. (RamNiwaspatel) Presidins 01ficer D.R.T,Jabalpur (M.P&c.G) |
Applicants
Respondent
Ram Niwas Patel
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
