The court noted the absence of the appellant in a miscellaneous appeal taken up for second time and dismissed it for lack of prosecution.
No substantive relief affected as the appeal was 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.
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 122/2008
Date: September 12. 20 16.
IHONBLC MR. IUSTICE ALOK SI-IARMA
Nolie for the appellant.
Ms. Zalima Furohit for respondents.
No one has appeared on behalf of the appellant, even though the case has been taken up in second romtd. It appears that the appellant is not interested in agitating the issue raised in the miscellaneous appeal.
The miscellaileous appeal is disndssed for 11011 prosecutioll.
(~Iok Sharma), J.
Aluk ShAarm
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
