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
1 paragraphs · 163 wordsMatter is taken up after short pass over. It is seen that vide order dated 31.10.2022, learned counsel for the petitioner was directed to file written submissions depicting the calculation sheets of total amount claimed and was also directed to file affidavit under Section 9(3)(b) of the Code by clearly mentioning that there is no pre-existing dispute between the parties but after that today is the third date of hearing. On 17.11.2022 none appeared on the behalf of the petitioner, so as a matter of indulgence one opportunity was granted to him for making compliance of order dated 31.10.2022. Even on the last date of hearing, original counsel was not present on the behalf of petitioner only proxy counsel was present. Today also there is no representation on the behalf of the petitioner. It seems that petitioner/operational creditor is not interested in pursuing the present petition which is pertained to year 2019 and thus the present petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.