The Patna High Court dismissed a writ application for non-prosecution as the petitioner appeared for the first time after repeated non-appearances and so too on the day of hearing.
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.
Patna High Court CWJC No.3770 of 2012 (4) dt.02-09-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3770 of 2012 ====================================================== Madhumala Kumari @ Madhumala Devi .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH KUMAR DATTA ORAL ORDER 4 02-09-2013 No one had appeared for the petitioner earlier also. The writ application was dismissed for default on account of repeated non-appearance of learned counsel for the petitioner but subsequently restored. Today also, no one appears for the petitioner. The writ application is, accordingly, dismissed for non-prosecution.
(Ramesh Kumar Datta, J)
V.P.Sinha/-
Madhumala Kumari @ Madhumala Devi
The State Of Bihar
Ramesh Kumar Datta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
