The petition was dismissed for want of prosecution as no representation appeared before the court for two consecutive dates including the current hearing. The matter is disposed of without adjudication on merits.
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.
S. No. 36
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
CRMC No. 359/2016 IA No. 1/2016
Niaz Ahmed and others
...Appellant/Petitioner(s)
Through :- None v/s
State of J&K and others
.....Respondent (s)
Through :- None
Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE
ORDER
There has been no representation on behalf of the petitioners for
the last two consecutive dates of hearing and same is the position today also. It seems that the petitioners have lost interest in prosecuting the present petition.
Hence, the present petition along with connected IA is dismissed
for non-prosecution.
(RAJNESH OSWAL)
JUDGE
JAMMU 01.09.2021 Neha Whether the order is speaking: Yes/No Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No
NEHA KUMARI 2021.09.01 17:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Niaz Ahmed and others
State of J&K and others
RAJNESH OSWAL
NEHA KUMARI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
