The High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur dismissed a civil first appeal for want of prosecution due to the appellant's absence and failure to serve alternative arrangements.
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 First Appeal No. 124/1996
----Appellant
Versus
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : None present For Respondent(s) : Mr. A. K. Rajvanshi Mr. Ankit Bhaskar
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS
Order
26/08/2022
On 02.03.2021, when the case was listed before this Court, learned counsel appearing for the appellants pleaded no instruction on behalf of the appellant and, therefore, this Court directed the Registry to send the notices of information to the appellant for making alternative arrangement to ensure their representation before this Court.
As per office reports, it appears that the notice upon appellants could not be served for want of addresses. Today also nobody appeared on behalf of the appellants.
(2 of 2)
[CFA-124/1996]
It appears that the appellants do not want to prosecute the present appeal.
In view of above, the present Civil First Appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.
(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J
23-neha/-
M/s Jain Tyre And Company
Smt. Premkawar
Dunlup India
Maharajakumar Chand Bhandari
Madan Gopal Vyas
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
