The petitioner did not appear before the court despite multiple calls. The court held that the petitioner is not interested and dismissed the petition for non-prosecution.
Petition dismissed for non-prosecution due to absence of petitioner.
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 AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
CRM-M-35968 of 2016 (O&M) Date of Decision: 08.03.2017
Navneet Kansal
..........PETITIONER(s).
VERSUS
State of Haryana
........RESPONDENT(s).
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA
Present: None for the petitioner.
Mr. Tanuj Sharma, Asstt. A.G. Haryana
SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral)
None has appeared for the petitioner despite calling the case several times. The petitioner appears to be not interested in pursuing this petition.
Dismissed for non-prosecution.
March 08, 2017 jk
( SURINDER GUPTA ) JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No
Yes/No
Jitender Kumar 2017.03.09 10:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH
Navneet Kansal
State of Haryana
SURINDER GUPTA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
