Order dismissing a contempt case for default as the petitioner appeared neither on the date of dismissal order nor on the current 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.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU
CONTEMPT CASE No.837 of 2009
ORDER:
On 13.09.2010, when the matter was called, none appeared for the petitioner and, therefore, the matter was directed to be posted for dismissal. Today, despite the matter being listed under the caption “for dismissal”, none appears nor there is any representation on behalf of the petitioner.
The contempt case is, accordingly, dismissed for default.
______________________ JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU
27.09.2010 v v
C.V.RAMULU
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
