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
5 paragraphs · 275 wordsH.P. Sandesh, J
This Court vide order dated 17-9-2019 granted three weeks time to comply with the office objections and also made it clear that if the office objections are not complied within such period, the appeal would be dismissed. After compliance, the matter was posted on 16-10-2019 and emergent notice was issued to the respondents on interlocutory applications and on appeal. On 2-3-2023, when the matter came up for hearing on I.A. No.1 of 2018 to condone the delay of 2244 days in filing the appeal, the learned counsel sought time to produce the medical records. When the matter was posted on 10-3-2023, the learned counsel again sought for one week's time. On 17-3-2023, the learned counsel again sought time on the ground that the appellant is not responding to his instructions and in the interest of justice, granted two weeks' time and directed to list the matter on 31-3-2023.
On 31-3-2023, the learned counsel files a memo for retirement. Hence, this Court directed the learned counsel for the appellant to write a fresh letter to the party and to produce the acknowledgement. However, more than a year has been passed, he has not produced the acknowledgement.
Having perused the entire order-sheet and also the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is not responding, it appears that the appellant is not interested in pursuing the matter diligently. Hence, I do not find any ground to grant time again or to adjourn the matter. Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed for non-prosecution.
In view of the dismissal of the appeal, all pending interlocutory applications stand disposed off.