The Special Appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution due to a prolonged absence of appearance or representation by the Applicant.
The Special Appeal No. 9 of 2022 stands 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.
| 24.04.2025 | Exh. | Roznama-MDRT-II S.A. No.9 of 2022 |
Next date |
|---|---|---|---|
| None for the parties. | |||
| rst - 39 | Case called out but there is no response from either of the parties. Order-sheet of the learned Registrar dated 16.01.2025 shows that no representation was made by the Applicant since 29.07.2022. 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, S.A. No.9 of 2022 stands dismissed for want of prosecution. File be consigned to the Record Room after due compliance. Sd/- P.O. DRT-II |
Closed |
1 issue framed by the court
Whether Special Appeal No. 9 of 2022 should be dismissed for want of prosecution.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
