The High Court dismissed a second appeal pending since 1993 due to appellant's default in appearance. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed under Order XLI Rule 17, CPC, with liberty to apply for readmission under Rule 19.
Allowance of application for readmission under Order XLI Rule 19 CPC; dismissal of appeal under Order XLI Rule 17 CPC.
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.28 of 1993
======================================================
Achin Lal Singh
... ... Appellant/S
Versus
Ram Chandar Raman
... ... Respondent/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : None. For the Respondent/s : None. ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER
4 18-12-2023
Upon repeated call, no one appears either on behalf of the appellant or on behalf of the counsel for the respondent.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Prakashmani/-
U
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the second appeal should be allowed despite the appellant's failure to appear for hearing.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Achin Lal Singh
Ram Chandar Raman
Anshuman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
