AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
S.P. Mehrotra, J.—Case called out in the revised list. However, the learned Counsel for the appellant is not present.
On account of failure on the part of the learned Counsel for the appellant to take requisite steps for issuance of notices to the respondent No. 1 and the respondent Nos. 3 to 15 on the second appeal, pursuant to the order dated 20.4.1999 passed by the Additional Registrar, the case is listed today under Chapter XII, Rule 4 of the Rules of the Court with the Office Report dated 22.8.2006.
Even though the case is listed today under Chapter XII, Rule 4 of the Rules of the Court, requisite steps have not been taken by the learned Counsel for the appellant.
In the circumstances, the second appeal is liable to be dismissed for want of prosecution as against the respondent No. 1, and the respondent Nos. 3 to 15 under Chapter XII, Rule 4 of the Rules of the Court.
Further, as noted above, none is present on behalf of the appellant even when the case has been taken up in the revised list. The second appeal is, therefore, liable to be dismissed for want of prosecution.
The second appeal is accordingly dismissed for want of prosecution.