The applicant failed to appear or make representation on multiple dates. The court observed that the applicant is not interested in pursuing the case, leading to dismissal 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.
| 24.04.2025 | Exh. | Roznama-MDRT-II O.A. No.403 of 2022 |
Next date |
|---|---|---|---|
| None for the parties. | |||
| rst - 32 | Case called out but there is no response from either of the parties. Order-sheet of the learned Registrar dated 21.03.2025 shows that no representation was made by the parties. Even today, no representation is made by the Applicant either personally or through the Advocate. It appears that the Applicant is not interested in pursuing this case any further. So, O.A. No.403 of 2022 stands dismissed for want of prosecution. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. File be consigned to the Record Room after due compliance. Sd/- P.O. DRT-II |
Closed |
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
