Second appeal dismissed as incompetent due to absence of appellants and inclusion of some respondents against whom the matter was previously treated as dismissed.
Appeal dismissed as incompetent.
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.66 of 1991 (10) dt.09-07-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Second Appeal No.66 of 1991 ====================================================== Dhanraj Kuer & Ors. .... .... Appellant/s Versus Mundrika Singh & Ors. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Uma Shankar Singh Mr. Rameshwar Singh Mr. Nawal Kishore Singh Mr. Satish Kr.Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr. Shri Niwas Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. NATH ORAL ORDER 10 09-07-2015 Nobody appears on behalf of the appellants. Perused the office note from which it transpires that this appeal has stood dismissed on 24.06.2015 as against respondent nos. 7 (a) to 7 (c) and the matter has now been placed for considering the competency of the appeal in absence of respondent nos. 7 (a) to 7 (c). As no one has appeared on behalf of the appellants to show that this appeal can proceed with the remaining respondents on record, this appeal is dismissed as incompetent.
(V. Nath, J) Devendra/U
Dhanraj Kuer & Ors.
Mundrika Singh & Ors.
V. Nath
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
