A curator ad litem order was expired without the petitioner attending hearings. The High Court dismissed the writ petition for non-prosecution due to lack of interest by the petitioner.
Writ petition dismissed for non-prosecution.
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 PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
C.W.P. No. 8131 of 1991 Date of decision : 07.02.2011
Nirmal Singh
....Petitioner
versus
The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, U.T., Chandigarh and another
....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR
Present : Nemo for the parties.
M ehinder S ingh S ullar, J. (Oral)
This writ petition was filed in this Court on 01.06.1991 and was admitted on 07.08.1991. The bare perusal of the record would reveal that none had appeared on behalf of the petitioner on 27.01.2011, when this petition came up for hearing. Consequently, the case was adjourned to 07.02.2011 for arguments
Today, again no one is present on his behalf despite the case having been called twice.
From the sequence of events narrated here-in-above, it appears that neither the petitioner nor his counsel are interested in pursuing the petition. Therefore, no option is left with this Court except to dismiss the writ petition for non-prosecution.
Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed for non-
prosecution.
February 07, 2011 G.Arora
Nirmal Singh
The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, U.T., Chandigarh
another
Mehinder Singh Sullar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
