Indian Overseas Bank v. Kalinga Industries
Case brief
What is this about?
The court dismissed an application for restoration of a first appeal due to unrectified cloud dates and non-appearance by the petitioner's counsel.
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.
M.J.C. No.168 of 1998
02. 21.11.2017 This is an application for restoration of the First Appeal filed again
st the judgment and decree passed by the learned Additional Subordinate Judge, Cuttack in Mone
y Suit No.290 of 1978 dismissing the suit of the petitioner on 15.03.1983.
The appeal has been dismissed on 30.03.1998 when it was at the stage of substi
tution of the legal representatives of respondent no.2 for non-appearance of the learned couns
el for the appellant-petitioner.
Here in this application giving rise to M.J.C., the note of the S.R. dated 23.
04.1999 has remained unrectified as yet.
Also none appears for the petitioner when the matter is called.
In view of the above, the application stands dismissed.
D. Dash, J.
H
// 2 //
Petitioner/Appellant
Respondent No.2
D. Dash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court