Dismissed
Kasi v. Chiranjibi
Orissa HCSA/45/1987
Case brief
AI extract
What is this about?
The Second Appeal was disposed of in abatement due to non-prosecution by the appellant. The legal representatives of the deceased respondent contended that the appeal had abated by operation of law, with no steps taken on behalf of the appellant.
What did the court decide?
The Second Appeal was dismissed as abated.
What the court decided
AI extract
¶1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
¶2
SA No.45 of 1987
¶3
Kasi Panda
¶4
…. Appellant Mr. B.B. Ratho, Advocate
¶5
-versus-
¶6
Chiranjibi Sabat & Others
¶7
…. Respondents Mr. B. Pal, Advocate
¶8
CORAM:
¶9
MR. JUSTICE D.DASH
¶10
ORDER 08.09.2021
¶11
Order No.
¶12
- This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode).
Parties & counsel
AI extract
- appellant
Kasi Panda
- respondent
Chiranjibi Sabat
Coram
AI extract
D. Dash
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court