Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

INDER SINGH versus CHAUMAL

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Inder Singh v. Chaumal - SECOND APPEAL No. 1257 of 1981 [2006] RD-AH 7943 (19 April 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

        Court No.48

Second Appeal No. 1257 of 1981

                        Inder Singh Vs. Chaumal

Hon. S.P. Mehrotra, J.

By the order dated 23.12.2005, notice was directed to be issued to the plaintiff-appellant to engage another counsel as the learned Advocate, who had been appearing as the learned counsel for the plaintiff-appellant , had been elevated to the Bench of this Court.

A perusal of the Office Report dated 23.12.2005 shows that  notice fixing 23.3.2006 was issued to the plaintiff-appellant( Inder Singh) by Registered Post A.D.

The case was listed before the Court on 22.3.2006 with the Office Report dated 21.3.2006 in regard to service of notice issued to the plaintiff-appellant , pursuant to the said order dated 23.12.2005.

In view of the said Office Report dated 21.3.2006, the Court by its order dated 22.3.2006 directed that  service of notice be awaited, and the case be listed after four weeks.

Pursuant to the  said order dated 22.3.2006, the case has been listed today with the Office Report dated 6.4.2006.

A perusal of the said Office Report dated 6.4.2006 shows that the Registered Envelop wherein the notice was sent to the plaintiff-appellant, pursuant to the said order dated 23.12.2005, has been returned back undelivered with the endorsement that the addressee

Inder Singh ( plaintiff-appellant) had expired.

It is further apparent from the said Office Report dated 6.4.2006 that no substitution application has been filed on behalf of the heirs and legal representatives of the said Inder Singh ( plaintiff-appellant ) for being substituted in place of the said Inder Singh

(plaintiff-appellant ) .

In view of the above, it is evident that the Second Appeal  at the instance of the said Inder Singh ( plaintiff-appellant )  stands  abated.

The said Inder Singh was the sole plaintiff-appellant. Therefore, the Second Appeal stands dismissed as having abated.

Dt. 19.4.2006/ Second Appeal No. 1257 of 1981/aks.


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.