Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2012
  6. /
  7. January

Divisional vs Bachubhai

High Court Of Gujarat|17 January, 2012

JUDGMENT / ORDER

1. This petition was dismissed for non-prosecution vide order dated 25.3.2009.
2. Subsequently Misc. Civil Application No.1372 of 2009 was taken out by the petitioner with a request that the said order dated 25.3.2009 may be recalled and the proceedings may be restored.
3. It is pertinent to note that when the said Misc. Civil Application No. 1372 of 2009 was taken up for hearing, leaned advocate for the petitioner was not present on the said date also. However, vide order dated 19.6.2009 the request to recall the order dated 25.3.2009 was granted with below mentioned observations:-
"2.
After circulating application, the learned advocate for the applicant-petitioner has not remained present today during the hearing when the matter is taken up.
3. Considering the averments made in the application it can be said that sufficient cause for recalling the order dated 25.3.2009 has been made out. Hence, the order dated 25.3.2009 is recalled. The relief prayed for in paragraph No. 5(A) is granted. The Special Civil Application No. 2276 of 2009 is restored."
4. In view of the said order dated 19.6.2009 petition is circulated for hearing today.
5. However, today also when the petition is called out and taken up for hearing learned advocate for the petitioner is not present.
6. The above mentioned details would go to show that on 25.3.2009 when the petition was taken up for hearing learned advocate for the petitioner was not present. Thereafter when on 19.6.2009 the Misc. Civil Application No.1372 of 2009 seeking restoration of the petition being Special Civil Application No.2276 of 2009 by recalling the order dated 25.3.2009 was taken up for hearing again the learned advocate for the petitioner was not present and today after restoration of the petition when the petition is taken up for hearing again the learned advocate for the petitioner is not present. Any request for passover or adjournment is not made by any one. The petitioner is also not present. The proceedings are neglected.
Hence the petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.
(K.M.THAKER,J.) Suresh* Top
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Divisional vs Bachubhai

Court

High Court Of Gujarat

JudgmentDate
17 January, 2012