The High Court of Telangana dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution as the appellant's counsel was absent without valid reason, despite a prior warning.
Appeal dismissed for non-prosecution; pending miscellaneous petitions disposed of as infructuous.
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 for the State of Telangana
The Hon'ble Sri Justice Raghvendra Singh Chauhan
and
The Hon’ble Sri Justice T.Amarnath Goud F.C.A. No.108 of 2007
Date: 15-03-2019
Between:
Dr. Shanti
…Appellant
and
T. Venkateswara Rao
…Respondent
Counsel for the appellant: None present
Counsel for the respondent: None present
The Court made the following:
RSC, J & TA, J FCA.No.108 of 2007 Dt: 15-03-2019
2
Judgment: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Raghvendra Singh Chauhan)
This Appeal is filed against the order and decree dated 08-06-2007, in O.P.No.357 of 2004, on the file of the Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge for the trial of JHCBBC –cumAddl. Family Court, Hyderabad.
By order dated 25-01-2019, this Court had made it amply clear that in case the learned counsel for the appellant is not present on the next date of hearing, this appeal shall be dismissed for non-prosecution. Even today, the learned counsel for the appellant is absent.
Therefore, the present appeal is, hereby, dismissed for non-prosecution.
As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, stand disposed of as infructuous.
___________________________ (Raghvendra Singh Chauhan, J)
___________________ (T.Amarnath Goud, J)
Dt: 15th March, 2019 lur
Dr. Shanti
T. Venkateswara Rao
Raghvendra Singh Chauhan
T.Amarnath Goud
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
