In a writ petition, the petitioner failed to appear despite a previous opportunity being granted, despite the matter being previously adjourned. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition for want of prosecution.
Petition dismissed for want of 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 JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.20569/2012 Mukesh Kumar Karwasara
Vs.
State & Ors.
Date of Order :: 16/2/2015
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA
None present.
<><><>
None appeared on behalf of the petitioner to allow yet another opportunity of hearing to the counsel/petitioner, the matter was adjourned for a week, make it clear that if none appears on the next date, the matter would be dealt with on the basis of pleadings including proceedings ex-parte.
Today, neither the petitioner nor the counsel for the petitioner is present to prosecute the writ proceedings.
The writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.
(VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA), J.
A.Sharma/76
All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being e-mailed:
(Anil Sharma) Jr.P.A.
Mukesh Kumar Karwasara
State
Veerendr Singh Siradhana
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
