Citation : 2016 Latest Caselaw 6223 Del
Judgement Date : 23 September, 2016
$~4
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ RFA 268/2014
SMC PNEUMATICS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. & ANR...... Appellants
Through : None.
versus
JOGESH KWATRA ..... Respondent
Through : Mr. Munish Kumar Singh, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
ORDER
% 23.09.2016
1. The case was passed over on the first call as none was present for the appellant. At that stage, counsel for the respondent had drawn the attention of the Court to the statement made by Mr. Rajesh Chanana, Authorized Representative of the appellant company before the Joint Registrar on 14.9.2016 to the effect that since the respondent has expired, the appellant intends to withdraw the present appeal. In view of the submission made by the counsels for the parties, the Joint Registrar has placed the matter before this Court.
2. On the second call, the position remains the same. It is 3.15 PM, but none is present for the appellant.
3. It appears that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the present appeal, which is accordingly dismissed in default and for non- prosecution.
HIMA KOHLI, J SEPTEMBER 23, 2016/sk/rkb
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!