Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : L RAVICHANDER
For the Respondents: K.V. SUBRAHMANYA NARUSU

Non-prosecution of an appeal may lead to its dismissal.

Headnote:
dismissed - non-prosecution - The appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution, with no representation for the appellants, and no order as to costs.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants did not have representation in the court, and the matter was listed for dismissal.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution, with no order as to costs.
Issues: Non-prosecution of the appeal, lack of representation for the appellants.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that there was no representation for the appellants and the appeal was listed for dismissal, leading to the decision to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution, with no order as to costs.

JUDGMENT:

1. Perused the proceeding sheet dated 28.11.2023 & 4.01.2023 and the earlier orders of this Court. There was no representation for the appellants.

2. Today, the matter has been listed under the caption ‘for dismissal’. However, there is no representation for the appellants.

3. In the result, this appeal is ‘dismissed for non-prosecution’. No order as to costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.