First Appeal of 1986 dismissed for default as the appellant failed to appear on multiple dates despite direct notice; respondent also unrepresented. Court concluded appellant had lost interest in prosecuting the appeal.
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 FIRST APPEAL No.25 of 1986
======================================================
Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
M/s Rohtas Industries Ltd., Dalmianagar P.O.- Dalmia Nagar, Police StationDehri- on- Sone, Sub- Division Sasaram, District- Rohtas.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : None For the Respondent/s : None
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER
8 18-06-2026 Nobody appears on behalf of both the parties.
learned counsel for the appellant, in spite of direct notice has been issued to the appellant as per office notes dated 08.10.2025 and even today also, nobody appears on behalf of the appellant to press this application.
Patna High Court FA No.25 of 1986(8) dt.18-06-2026 2/2
Appeal No. 25 of 1986.
Code of Civil Procedure.
(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J)
Anand Kr.
U
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the first appeal of 1986 should be dismissed for default given the appellant's repeated non-appearance despite direct notice.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna
M/s Rohtas Industries Ltd.
Ramesh Chand Malviya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
