Second appeals filed by Sitab Lal against lower court orders were dismissed for default as no one appeared on behalf of the appellant on the hearing date.
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 SA No.398 of 1990 (11) dt.02-05-2013
| IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Second Appeal No.398 of 1990 ====================================================== |
|
|---|---|
| Sitab Lal .... .... Appellant/s Versus Sheo Prasad & Ors .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== |
|
| with Second Appeal No.401 of 1990 ====================================================== |
|
| Sitab Lal .... .... Appellant/s Versus |
|
| Sheo Prasad Tamera & Ors .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== |
|
Appearance : (In SA No.398 of 1990) For the Appellant/s : Mr. For the Respondent/s : Mr. (In SA No.401 of 1990) For the Appellant/s : Mr. For the Respondent/s : Mr. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER |
|
| 11 | 02-05-2013 On repeated call, no one appears on behalf of the appellant. The appeals are, accordingly, dismissed for default. (Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) |
BKS/-
Sitab Lal
Sheo Prasad & Ors
Chakradhari
Sharan Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
