Regular Second Appeal by an education trust dismissed for want of prosecution after the appellants remained unrepresented on multiple dates, including on the day of hearing.
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.
106-2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
RSA No.712 of 2019 (O&M) Date of Decision: 14.05.2024
Guru Nanak Education Trust Sangrur (Regd.) and another
…..Appellants.
Versus
Raj Kumar and others
.....Respondents.
CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA
Present:None for the appellants.
MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA, J . (Oral)
Despite the present matter having been taken up twice since morning, none has appeared in the Court today to represent the appellants. It is pertinent to mention here that on 09.08.2023 and on 20.01.2024 also, the appellants had remained unrepresented.
May 14, 2024 Yag Dutt
(MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether Reportable: No
YAG DUTT 2024.05.14 18:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment
Guru Nanak Education Trust Sangrur (Regd.) and another
Raj Kumar and others
Meenakshi I. Mehta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
