LawDistill
Supreme Court of India

GHAZIABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY vs RISHI LAL CHAWLA on 30 April, 2009

Cites 0 provisionsCites 0 judgmentsCited by 0
C.A. No.-007986-007986 - 2002Official PDFAdvocates RAKESH UTTAMCHANDRA UPADHYAY | MRS. VIPIN GUPTA

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7986 OF 2002

GHAZIABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Appellant (s)

VERSUS

RISHI LAL CHAWLA Respondent(s)

WITH Civil Appeal NO. 7983-7984 of 2002 (With office report)

Date: 30/04/2009 This Appeal was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

For Appellant(s) Mr. Devesh Kumar, Adv.for

Ms. Reena Singh, Adv.(NP)

Mr. Rakesh Uttamchandra Upadhyay,Adv.(NP)

Mr. Sudhir Kulshreshtha, Adv. (NP)

For Respondent(s) Dr. (Mrs.) Vipin Gupta,Adv.(NP)

Rr-Ex-Parte

UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following

The appeals are dismissed for non-prosecution.

[ Usha Bhardwaj ] [ Vijay Dhawan]

Court Master Court Master

Signed order is placed on the file.

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.7986 OF 2002

Ghaziabad Development Authority ...Appellant(s)

Versus

Rishi Lal Chawla ...Respondent(s)

WITH

CIVIL APPEAL NOS.7983-7984 OF 2002

Ghaziabad Development Authority ...Appellant(s)

Versus

Kanti Prasad Rajvanshi ....Respondent(s)

The matters were called out for hearing yesterday when a request for

adjournment was made by the counsel appearing for Ms. Reena Singh, Advocate on

the ground that she was in personal difficulty. The request for adjournment was

declined but the matter was passed over to enable the counsel to inform Ms. Singh

about our order. Somehow the matters could not be taken up yesterday and have

now been called out for hearing. Again the same counsel makes prayer for

adjournment. We have declined the prayer. We have requested the counsel to

argue, but he has expressed his

..2/-

:2:

inability to do so. Under the circumstances we have no option but to dismiss the

appeals for non-prosecution.

Ordered accordingly.

(D.K. JAIN)

(R.M. LODHA) New Delhi, APRIL 30, 2009.