The petitioner failed to appear in the pending miscellaneous application despite repeated summonses. The court found the petitioner uninterested in prosecuting the case and dismissed the application for non-prosecution.
Application dismissed for non-prosecution.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2460 of 2016
======================================================
Ram Jharo Kuwar
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The Union of India through the General Manager, East Central Railway, Hajipur (Bihar) .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : None. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anil Singh, Advocate. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA JAISWAL ORAL ORDER
4 22-08-2017 Despite repeated calls, no one turned up on behalf of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the respondent is present before the court.
It transpires that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the case.
Accordingly, this application is dismissed for non-
prosecution.
(Prakash Chandra Jaiswal, J)
Mishra/-
U
Ram Jharo Kuwar
The Union of India through the General Manager, East Central Railway
Prakash Chandra Jaiswal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
