Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 14112

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI, P. V. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ
SURESH BABU T. – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WA NO. 2348 OF 2018|WP(C) NO.32111 OF 2015

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: N.RAGHURAJ (SR.)
For the Respondents: M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR, K.JOHN MATHAI, JOSON MANAVALAN, KURYAN THOMAS, SUNIL KUMAR KURIAKOSE, JAI MOHAN

The failure to prosecute an appeal, evidenced by lack of action or response, results in dismissal for want of prosecution.

Headnote:The matter pertains to a writ appeal arising from WP

(C) No.32111 of 2015. The appellants did not pursue the appeal after issuance of notice in 2018, indicating lack of interest. The Court dismissed the writ appeal for want of prosecution. The crucial finding was the appellants' failure to serve notice and take necessary steps. The final verdict stated, 'Accordingly, the same is dismissed for want of prosecution.'

Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, J.

No one appears for the appellants. Moreover, notice was issued in the year of 2018, however, thereafter, the appellants does not take any steps to serve the notice on the respondents.

It appears that the appellants as well as the learned Counsel for the appellants have lost interest in prosecuting this writ appeal. Accordingly, the same is dismissed for want of prosecution.

Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 14112

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMSUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI, P. V. BALAKRISHNAN, JJSURESH BABU T. – AppellantVersusTHE STATE OF KERALA – RespondentWA NO. 2348 OF 2018|WP(C) NO.32111 OF 2015

The failure to prosecute an appeal, evidenced by lack of action or response, results in dismissal for want of prosecution.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI, P. V. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ
SURESH BABU T. – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WA NO. 2348 OF 2018|WP(C) NO.32111 OF 2015