Nanka And Others vs State Of U.P. And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 1139 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 6
 

 
Case :- SECOND APPEAL No. - 3440 of 1979
 

 
Appellant :- Nanka And Others
 
Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Appellant :- R.N. Upadhyay
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.B.Mishra
 

 
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.

Notice to engage another Counsel was issued vide order dated 14.08.2019 by registered post and courier. Notice sent by registered post says: "??? ??? ????? ??? ????". Even if this report is regarded to be correct, these are the appellants, to whom the N.E.C. has been issued and the address in the cause-title of the appeal is what the appellants have furnished to this Court. If the appellants are not found at the address given by them in the cause-title, it is apparent that they are deliberately evading service; else they have been negligent in contacting their Counsel and getting their address corrected in the cause-title of the appeal. In either event, service must be held to be sufficient, which is held accordingly.

The report from the courier, by which also steps were taken, had led to a report that neither undelivered cover received back nor Vakalatnama filed. The courier is an independent agency and since the undelivered cover has not been received back, service, in any case, must be held deemed sufficient.

When the case is called on, no one appears for the appellants. The appeal is of the year 1979.

It is, accordingly, dismissed for non-prosecution.

The lower court records shall be sent down to the Trial Court after expiry of the period of limitation to bring a restoration application.

Let a copy of this order be communicated to the Court, that now holds the charge of the Ex-Court of the Munsif-V, Fatehpur and decided Original Suit No.82 of 1968 vide judgment and decree dated 03.09.1977, through the learned District Judge, Fatehpur by the Registrar (Compliance) within 48 hours.

Order Date :- 11.4.2022

Anoop