Dismissed

Meghraj and Ors. v. Babu Lal and Ors.

Rajasthan HC7 Aug 2023CFA/192/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge dismissed the first appeal for non-prosecution due to persistent defects including lack of court fee since 2018. Apparelled by the court after service of a registered notice failed to cure these defects and to instruct the counsel to proceed.

What did the court decide?

The first appeal, stay petition, and application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act were dismissed for non-prosecution and non-compliance.

Meghraj and Ors. Vs Babu Lal and Ors. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JD:25106]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 192/2018

¶4

Meghraj S/o Babulal, By Caste Brahman, R/o Aalawas, Tehsil Sojat, District Pali Raj.

¶5

Bhanwari D/o Babulal, W/o Om Prakash, By Caste Brahman, R/o Chandna Bhakar, Jodhpurraj.

¶6

Padma Devi D/o Babulal, W/o Mahaveer Prasad, By Caste Brahman, R/o Opposite Mahila Thana, Pali, District Pali Raj.

¶7

Pushpa Devi D/o Banu Lal, W/o Sampatraj, B/c Brahman, R/o Suthla, First Puliya, Mahadev Ki Gali, Jodhpur Raj.

¶8

----Appellants

¶9

Versus

¶10

Babu Lal S/o Boridas, B/c Brahaman, R/o Aalawas, Tehsil Sojat, District Pali Raj.

¶11

Pani Devi W/o Mishra Ram, B/c Jat, R/o Dhundhla, Tehsil Marwar Junction, District Pali Raj.

¶12

Babli W/o Shankar Lal, B/c Jat, Resident Of Aalawas, Tehsil Sojat, Distirct Pali Raj

¶13

----Respondents

¶14

For Appellant(s)	: Mr. V.R. Choudhary
For Respondent(s)	: --

¶15

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

¶16

Order

¶17

07/08/2023

¶18

The present appeal pertains to the year 2018 and four defects including that of non filing of the Court fee were pointed out by the office. Despite time being granted on 12.07.2018 by the Registrar (Admn.) and further by the Court on 15.05.2023 as well as on 17.07.2023, the defects as pointed out by the office have not been removed.

[2023:RJ-JD:25106]

[CFA-192/2018]

(2 of 2)

The appeal is also reported to be barred by 66 days.

¶23

On 17.07.2023, counsel submitted that he is not in contact with the clients and therefore, prayed for time to serve a registered notice upon them.

¶24

Today, counsel submitted that the notice through registered post has been served by him and a copy of the same has also been placed on record. A perusal of the same shows that the notice has been served on 31.07.2023.

¶25

Learned counsel for the appellants pleads no instructions.

¶26

In view of the fact that the registered notice has been served by the counsel on the appellants and despite the notice having been served, they have not showed any inclination to pursue the present appeal and further that the defects including the filing of the Court fee have not been cured since the year 2018, the present appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution and for noncompliance.

¶27

The stay petition and the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act also stand dismissed .

¶28

(REKHA BORANA),J

¶29

27-Vij/-

Meghraj and Ors. v. Babu Lal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Meghraj and Ors. v. Babu Lal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kalawati Vs Rajbala and Anr.

Premlata Vs Jagjeet Daga

Premlata Vs Devendra Daga

J.K.Cement Ltd. Vs Mohd.Hussain

Smt Nausar Vs Smt Ramu Devi and Ors.

Central Bank of India Vs M/S Kitabghar and Ors.