AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 168 wordsS.P. Mehrotra, J.—Pursuant to the order dated 11102006, the case is listed today peremptorily.
Case has been takenup in the revised list. Learned Counsel for the plaintiffappellant is not present. Shri V.K. Rai, learned Counsel for the defendantrespondent is present.
A perusal of the ordersheet since 16122005 shows that on 16122005, 2452006, 572006, 3182006 and 1492006, the case was adjourned on account of the illness slip sent by the learned Counsel for the plaintiffappellant. Further, on 105 2006, 1782006, 2192006 and 11102006, the case was adjourned on account of the absence of the learned Counsel for the plaintiffappellant, even when the case was takenup in the revised list.
As noted above, even though the case is listed peremptorily today and has been takenup in the revised list, learned Counsel for the plaintiffappellant is not present.
In the circumstances, the Court has no option but to dismiss the Second Appeal for want of prosecution.
The Second Appeal is accordingly dismissed for want of prosecution.