The court dismissed the civil revision for non-prosecution as the petitioner failed to honour an undertaking to deposit Rs 2 lacs within the prescribed time.
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
Civil Revision No. 3627 of 2009 Date of decision : February 01, 2012
Ashik Ali
....Petitioner
versus
State Bank of India
....Respondent
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice L.N. Mittal
Present : Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner
Mr. Naveen Kansal, Advocate for Mr. Vikas Chatrath, Advocate, for the respondent
L.N. Mittal, J. (Oral)
Counsel for the petitioner pleads no instructions on behalf of petitioner. None else has appeared for the petitioner.
On 20.8.2010, counsel for the petitioner after seeking telephonic instructions from the petitioner had undertaken to deposit Rs 2 lacs with respondent - Bank before the next date of hearing but inspite of lapse of more than one year five months, the said undertaking has not been honoured and the petitioner was enjoying interim stay till the preceding date
of hearing.
Dismissed for non-prosecution.
( L.N. Mittal ) February 01, 2012 Judge 'dalbir'
Ashik Ali
State Bank of India
L.N. Mittal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
