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
12 paragraphs · 227 wordsVivek Singh Thakur, J
On 9th July, 2021, there was no representation on behalf of petitioner as well as respondent No.3.
In compliance of order dated 6.3.2020 an actual date notice was issued to petitioner for 30th April, 2020, which was duly served upon him.
However, on that day, for complete Lockdown on account of COVID-19 pandemic, the case could not be listed. However, a letter was received in
Registry on behalf of petitioner with request to inform him the next date of hearing on his mobile number, mentioned in his letter.
On previous date i.e. 9.7.2021, it was informed by Registry that telephonic information was communicated to petitioner with respect to listing of
case on that day, but, there was no representation on his behalf. But, on that day, in the interest of justice, matter was adjourned for today with
direction to Registry to inform next date of hearing to the petitioner on his mobile number.
4 As per report of Registry, listing of case today has also been informed to petitioner, but, there is no representation on his behalf. Notice issued to
respondent No.3 has not been received back.
5 In view of aforesaid circumstances, it appears that petitioner is not interested in pursuing the petition. Therefore, it is dismissed in default.
Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed of accordingly.