The High Court at Patna dismissed a writ petition quashing a CLRR decision under Section 38(3) LI Act 1960 due to lack of prosecution by the petitioner after repeated calls, as no one appeared on the hearing date.
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 Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10290 of 2023
======================================================
Ramniwas Sharma Son of Ramanand Sharma, Resident of Village- Kanth Chhapra, P.S.- Kotwa, District- East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : None For the Respondent/s : Mr.Raj Kishore Roy ( Gp 18 ) ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH
ORAL ORDER
3 02-07-2024 Despite repeated calls, nobody has bothered to appear for the petitioner, hence, it appears that the petitioner has got no interest in prosecuting the present writ petition, thus, this Court has no option but to dismiss the present writ petition for want of prosecution.
non-prosecution.
(Mohit Kumar Shah, J)
Ajay/- U
Ramniwas Sharma
The State of Bihar Through Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Govt. of Bihar
The Collector of East Champaran
Sumitra Devi
Mohit Kumar Shah
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
