Writ petition filed under Article 226 seeking mandamus to restore a case on appeal. The petition was dismissed as it was filed during non-prosecution because the petitioner failed to appear on the scheduled date.
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, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No: 8612 of 2001
Between:
M/s Sri Murali Spinning Mills Ltd., Rep. by its Chairman & Managing Director B-46, Durgabai Deshmukh Colony, Hyderabad
..... PETITIONER
AND
1 Appellate Authority for Industrial & Financial Reconstructio Rep. by its Chairman. 10th Floor, Jeevan Prakash, 25, Kasturiba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi, 2 Board for Industrial & Financial Reconstruction Rep. by its Chairman. 8th Floor Annexe, No.1 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi-110 001,
.....RESPONDENT(S)
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue an order, direction or writ particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring that the 1st Respondent in Appeal No.349 of 2000, 15-2-2001 as illegal, void and unjust and consequently direct the 1st Respondent to restore the case on file and consider the appeal of the Petitioner on merit and pass
Counsel for the Petitioner:MRP.VSANJEEVA MURTHY
Counsel for the Respondent No.: .
The Court made the following :
ORDER:
Since none appeared for the petitioner on 05-11-2008 the writ petition was directed to be listed today under the caption ‘for dismissal’. Even today also, neither the counsel for petitioner is present nor there is any representation on behalf of the petitioner.
Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs.
______________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J. 6th November 2008 CVRK
M/s Sri Murali Spinning Mills Ltd.
1 Appellate Authority for Industrial & Financial Reconstruction
Board for Industrial & Financial Reconstruction
Ramesh Ranganathan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
