Sudina Vs. Ashok Kumar

Sudina vs Ashok Kumar

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Apr 05, 2013

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1053666

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1053666
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On: Apr 05, 2013
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sudina

Respondent

Ashok Kumar

Excerpt

1 m.a.no.223/09. 5.4.2013 . none for the appellants this case is listed today for admission. the record of the tribunal has already been received long before. in the absence of the appellant and his counsel this appeal could not be considered on the question of admission. even otherwise in view of the provision of order 41 rule 17 of cpc in the absence of the appellant this appeal could not be considered on merits. in such premises there is only option with the court either to adjourn the case or to dismiss the same for want of prosecution. earlier this case was listed on 19.8.2011 but it is apparent from the order sheet that on such date also no one was present to prosecute this appeal. in such premises it appears that the appellants are no more interested in prosecuting the present appeal. hence, the same is hereby dismissed for want of prosecution. (u. c.maheshwari) judge k

Full Judgment

1 M.A.No.223/09.

5.4.2013 .

None for the appellants This case is listed today for admission.

The record of the Tribunal has already been received long before.

In the absence of the appellant and his counsel this appeal could not be considered on the question of admission.

Even otherwise in view of the provision of Order 41 Rule 17 of CPC in the absence of the appellant this appeal could not be considered on merits.

In such premises there is only option with the Court either to adjourn the case or to dismiss the same for want of prosecution.

Earlier this case was listed on 19.8.2011 but it is apparent from the order sheet that on such date also no one was present to prosecute this appeal.

In such premises it appears that the appellants are no more interested in prosecuting the present appeal.

Hence, the same is hereby dismissed for want of prosecution.

(U.

C.Maheshwari) Judge k

Same Court & Year Madhya Pradesh · 2013 Same Parties Sudina vs Ashok Kumar Same Subject Education