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
6 paragraphs · 278 wordsHeard Mr. Rounak Nayak. Advocate for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent.
Mr. Nayak last appeared on behalf of the petitioner on 19.3.2021 and on his prayer, three weeks' further time was granted to the petitioner for filing rejoinder, by way of last indulgence. The matter could not be listed on the date fixed i.e. 3.5.2021 due to COVID but on 6.8.2021, when the matter was listed there was no appearance on behalf of the petitioner. Learned Registrar has directed for sending a copy of the order dated 6.8.2021 through email to the learned counsel for the petitioner. But learned counsel for the petitioner could not appear on the next date i.e. 27.9.2021. Thereafter the matter has been listed today for passing appropriate orders because nobody has been appearing to press or pursue the petition.
Mr. Rounak Nayak, Advocate submits that he could not file rejoinder even after time on 19.3.2021 because he is getting no instructions from his client, the petitioner. Further non appearance was on that account only. He verbally seeks an order for his discharge from the present proceeding on the ground that he is unable to represent the petitioner in absence of any instructions.
Learned counsel for the respondent has no objection to the prayer. The prayer for discharge is allowed.
Learned counsel for the respondent prays for considering the aforesaid facts and to dismiss the petition for lack of prosecution by the petitioner on account of absence of instructions. There appears no good reason for not accepting the aforesaid prayer made on behalf of the respondent.
The petition is dismissed for non prosecution and disposed of accordingly, alongwith MA, if any.