The appeal was dismissed due to the non-appearance of the appellant on the day of hearing. The matter had been previously directed to be listed 'For Dismissal' for default, but the appellant's counsel had indicated absence of instructions. The court, noting no presence or representation today, dismissed the appeal as a default.
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 M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY A.S.NO.1090 OF 1997
JUDGMENT:
On 24.08.2015, since no representation was made on behalf of the appellant, the matter was directed to be listed under the caption “For Dismissal”. On 08.09.2015, Sri K.Ranga Rao, learned counsel for the appellant, represented that his client took away the entire bundle and that he has no instructions in the matter. Thereupon, this Court directed the Registry to print the name of the appellant in the Cause List.
Accordingly, today, the name of the appellant is printed in the Cause List but none appears or any representation is made on behalf of the appellant.
Hence, the appeal is dismissed for default. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand dismissed.
___________________________ (M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, J)
14th September 2015 RRB
M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
