The High Court dismissed the Civil Miscellaneous petition for want of prosecution as the petitioner's counsel did not appear.
The petition was dismissed for non-apparance of the petitioner's counsel.
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 CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.650 of 2018
======================================================
Gobardhan Singh S/o Late Nathuni Singh, R/o Village and P.O.- Mohania, P.S.- Mohania, District- Kaimur Bhabua.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
Srimati Tetara Devi @ Tetra Devi @ Tetari Devi W/o Ram Barayee Yadav, R/o Village- Rasulpur, P.O. and P.S.- Mohania, District- Kaimur Bhabua.
... ... Respondent/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : None For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER
4 21-09-2022 No one appears for the petitioner.
Mr. Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel for the
respondent is present.
The petition is dismissed for non prosecution.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
perwez
U
Gobardhan Singh S/o Late Nathuni Singh
Srimati Tetara Devi @ Tetra Devi @ Tetari Devi
Anil Kumar Sinha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
