Petitioner was dismissed in default for want of prosecution after failing to appear despite a last opportunity.
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.
255 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Neutral Citation No. 2023:PHHC:156705 CRR-552-2022 Date of Decision: December 07, 2023
Het Ram
…Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others
…Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA
Present: - None.
DEEPAK GUPTA, J.(Oral)
On the last date of hearing, following order was passed:-
“ There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner.
Adjourned to 07.12.2023.
It shall be last opportunity.”
Today again, there is no representation on behalf of the
petitioner. It is despite the fact that last opportunity had been granted. These circumstances reveal that petitioner is no longer interested in pursuing this petition.
Dismissed in default for want of prosecution.
| December 07, 2023 | (DE | EPAK GUPTA) |
|---|---|---|
| sarita |
JUDGE | |
| Whether reasoned/speaking: | Yes/No | |
| Whether reportable: | Yes/No |
SARITA RANI 2023.12.06 17:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document/order
HET RAM
STATE OF HARYANA
DEEPAK GUPTA
SARITA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
