✦ Gauhati High Court

Judgment · High Court

Judgment

Heard Mr. A. Ganguly, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A. Phuk an, learned counsel for the respondent. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties as well as the averments made in th is application, I am satisfied that the petitioner is prevented by sufficient ca use in appearing before the Court when the matter is taken up on 15/9/10 and res ultantly the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution. Accordingly, the order dated 15/9/10 passed in Misc. Case No. 1767/10 stands rec alled. The Misc. case is restored to its original file and number. Misc. case stands disposed of.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Gauhati High Court or eCourts case status. ← Search more judgments