The High Court at Patna dismissed the Second Appeal by default as respondents Nos. 6 and 8 failed to comply with a peremptory order. With no steps for restoration and appellants being absent, the appeal abated and was dismissed.
Second Appeal dismissed for default; appeal abated and stands dismissed.
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 Second Appeal No.153 of 1989
======================================================
SITA DEVI
... ... Appellant/s
Versus RAM JANAM SINGH ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Sinha For the Respondent/s : Mr. Abhay Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH
ORAL ORDER
24 25-10-2018
There is no representation on behalf of the appellant. The Second Appeal stood dismissed for default as against respondent Nos. 6 and 8 for non-compliance of peremptory order. No steps have been taken for restoration of Second Appeal to the extent it relates to its dismissal as against respondents Nos. 7 and 8. This appeal cannot proceed in the absence of respondents Nos. 6 and 8 and abates as a whole and thus stands dismissed.
(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J)
Pawan/Ragini
U
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Second Appeal should be dismissed for non-compliance of peremptory order and consequent default by respondents.
Sita Devi
Ram Janam Singh
Chakradhari Sharan Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
