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
8 paragraphs · 233 wordsS.P. Mehrotra, J.
On account of failure on the part of the learned Counsel for the defendantsappellants to take requisite steps for issuance of notice on the Appeal to the defendants respondents Nos. 2, 3/1 and 3/2 and the proforma plaintiffsrespondents Nos. 4 and 5, pursuant to the order dated 751987 passed by the Joint Registrar read with the order dated 182006 passed by the Court, the case is listed today under Chapter XII, Rule 4 of the Rules of the Court.
The Office has submitted its Report dated 782006.
The case has been takenup in the revised list. Learned Counsel for the defendantsappellants are not present. Smt. Shobha Srivastava holding brief for Shri S.M. Dayal, learned Counsel for the plaintiffsrespondents Nos. 1/1 to 1/3 is present.
Even though the case is listed today under Chapter XII Rule 4 of the Rules of the Court, requisite steps have not been taken.
In the circumstances, the Second Appeal is liable to be dismissed for want of prosecution under Chapter XII, Rule 4 of the Rules of the Court, as against the defendantsrespondents Nos. 2, 3/1 and 3/2 and the proforma plaintiffs respondents Nos. 4 and 5.
Further, as none is present for the defendantsappellants, the Second Appeal itself is liable to be dismissed for want of prosecution.
The Second Appeal is accordingly dismissed for want of prosecution.