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 · 216 wordsDr. Sanjiv Kumar, Member (A)
Shri Satish Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant has sent his illness slip. Shri Vidyapati Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondents is present.
As pointed out by counsel for respondents that on several occasions, applicant counsel has sent his illness slip. On 12.12.2023 also, there was illness slip for the applicant’s counsel. Similarly, on 22.09.2023 also, there was illness slip for the applicant counsel and on that date it was very specifically mentioned that both the counsels are directed to be present and argue the case on the next date. In case of any exigencies, substitute arrangement should be made by the respective counsels.
On 29.03.2023, there was also none present for the applicant and it was categorically mentioned in the order sheet that case is pending since 2012, therefore, last opportunity is granted. In case of any difficulty, some alternative arrangements should be made on the next date.
Considering the repeated absence of the counsel for the applicant, it is clear that they have lost interest in the case and there is no one to press in the case of the applicant.
Considering the same, the case is dismissed in default.
All associated MAs also stand disposed of.
No order as to costs.