Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 194453 (ALL)

MUMTAZ AHMAD v. SHEO CHAND AND OTHERS

SAPL/2232/1982 · 2025-10-28

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD SECOND APPEAL No. - 2232 of 1982 Court No. - 36 HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J. 1. On 14.08.2025, notice was issued to the appellant as well as respondents to engage another counsel. 2. As per office report dated 28.10.2025 notice issued to the appellant as well as respondents no.2, 4, 5 and 6 has not returned after service and as such notice upon them is deemed to be sufficient. As far as notice sent to respondents no.1 and 3 is concerned, the same has returned after service with postal remarks "Dead." 3. In view of the said office report, as the notice has not returned after service upon the appellant and also no one has put in appearance to press the appeal, the appeal stands dismissed for want of prosecution. October 29, 2025 SK Goswami Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : I.A.Khan, S.A.Ansari Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.Rathore (Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.) Mumtaz Ahmad .....Appellant(s) Sheo Chand And Others .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- SHIVAKANT GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad