Section S.A. No.182 of 2022 was dismissed for want of prosecution as the applicant failed to pursue the case and made no representations.
Dismissal of Section S.A. No.182 of 2022 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.
| 21.03.2025 | Exh. | Roznama-MDRT-II S.A. No.181 of 2022 |
Next date |
|---|---|---|---|
| nrb – 30 | None for the Applicant. Ms Saupada Sukale i/b M/s. Optimus Legal, Advocate for Respondent. Counsel for the Respondent drew the Tribunal’s attention to orders dated 11.07.2024 and 17.10.2024 showing that the Applicant was given last chance to take further steps in the matter but the Applicant has failed to do so. Even today, no representation is made by the Applicant either personally or through the Advocate. Considering the submission made by the Counsel for the Respondent and the perusal of the order-sheet, it appears that the Applicant is not interested in pursuing this case any further. So, S.A. No.182 of 2022 stands dismissed for want of prosecution. File be consigned to the Record Room after due compliance. Sd/- P.O. DRT-II |
Closed |
Applicant
Respondent
P.O.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
