The appeal in SA 111/2016 was dismissed in nonprosecution as the appellant failed to appear in the second session or previous dates despite the list being revised thrice, indicating lack of interest in pursuing the appeal.
Appeal dismissed in nonprosecution due to non-appearance.
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.
SA 111/2016
Hon’ble Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.
None turned up on behalf of the appellant even in the second session of the Court, while the list has been revised thrice. None had appeared even on the previous date.
This appeal has been preferred against the concurrent findings of the Courts below. It is pending at the admission stage itself and no stay was ever granted.
So, it appears that the appellant is not interested in pursuing his appeal. Therefore, this appeal is dismissed in nonprosecution.
(Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.) 4.7.2017
Prabodh
Appellant
Respondent
Servesh Kumar Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
