In this second appeal, the High Court dismissed the matter for want of prosecution as the appellant's counsel reported having received no further instructions from the appellant. No substantive legal issue was adjudicated.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR.
..
S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 172 / 2012.
MOTI LAL SUTHAR, Aged about 75 years, S/o Shri Bardi Chand, R/o Shri Suparshavnath Ji Ke Mandir Ka Upasara 8, Babelon Ki Sehri, Udaipur (Raj.).
----Appellant
Versus
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) :
Mr. Anurag Shukla.
(2 of 2)
[CSA-172/2012]
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
27/04/2018
BY THE COURT :
Mr. Anurag Shukla, learned counsel for the appellant, informs that after filing of the present appeal in the year 2012, the appellant has neither contacted him, nor has he given any instructions in relation to the appeal, despite all sincere efforts made by him.
In view of the above, Mr. Shukla pleads ‘No Instructions’ on behalf of the appellant.
Accordingly, the present second appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.
A copy of this order be sent to the appellant.
(DINESH MEHTA), J.
/Mohan/77
MOTI LAL SUTHAR
PRANIYAS SUPARSHAVNATH JI KA MANDIR
MAHENDRA SINGH SUTHAR
DINESH MEHTA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
