SHRI TAPSI RAM AND 6 OTHERS v. SMT ANUPAMA AND 7 OTHERS
SAPL/597/2024 · 2025-04-17
Dinesh Pathak
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 59736 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 59736 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:57786 Court No. - 37 Case :- SECOND APPEAL No. - 597 of 2024 Appellant :- Shri Tapsi Ram And 6 Others Respondent :- Smt Anupama And 7 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Ajay Kumar Singh,Ashish Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Ayush Jain,Ram Prakash Srivastava,Satyendra Narayan Singh,Vikas Singh Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.
1. Counsel for the respondents is present. None is present for the appellants.
2. On the previous occasion, counsel for the appellants has made statement that he has no instructions to argue the instant appeal. For ready reference, order dated 19.09.2024 is quoted herein below :-
"1. Case Called out.
2. Shri Virendra Kumar, learned counsel holding brief of Shri Ashish Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the appellants seeks adjournment today.
3. On previous two dates, i.e. 09.08.2024 and 31.08.2024, following orders were passed: 09.08.2024
"1. A request for adjournment has been made on behalf of Sri Ashish Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the appellants.
2. Sri Pramod Jain, learned Senior Counsel, states that the appeal was filed in March, 2024 and is being adjourned from time to time and has no substance on merits.
3. Put up as fresh on 23.08.2024, on which date, the appeal shall not be adjourned." 31.08.2024
"As jointly prayed by learned counsel for the parties, put up as fresh on 19.09.2024."
4. The Court also recollects that on the previous occasion, Shri Ashish Kumar Singh had made a statement that he would not argue the appeal and some other Advocate shall appear, however, today also adjournment is being sought on behalf of Shri Ashish Kumar Singh.
5. In view of above, list in ordinary course.
6. It is made clear that pendency of this appeal shall not amount to passing of any interim order and necessary consequences arising out of decree impugned in the appeal shall ensue."
3. However, till date, any other counsel has not filed his memo of
appearance being counsel for the appellants. It appears that the appellants have lost interest in the matter.
4. As such, instant second appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. Order Date :- 18.4.2025 VR Digitally signed by :- VIBHA RATAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad