In the absence of parties' appearance for the fourth time despite earlier time extensions, the Patna High Court dismissed the second appeal as default under Order XLI Rule 17 CPC, granting liberty to apply for readmission under Order XLI Rule 19.
Liberty granted to file an application for readmission of the appeal dismissed for default.
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.412 of 1987
======================================================
Sheoji Rai
... ... Appellant/S
Versus
Kanhiaya Rai And Ors
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : None. For the Respondent/s : None. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER
16 22-01-2024
No one appears either on behalf of the appellant or
on behalf of the respondents.
Patna High Court SA No.412 of 1987(16) dt.22-01-2024 2/2
of Civil Procedure, 1908.
court concerned.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Prakashmani/-
U
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to dismiss the second appeal due to appellant's default in appearance despite extension of time.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Sheoji Rai
Kanhiaya Rai And Ors
Anshuman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
