← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/5719/2016dismiss for nonprosecution

Anjani Kr. Thakur v. State Bank Of India And ORS

2024-04-23Justice Smt. G. Anupama Chakravarthy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5719 of 2016 ====================================================== Anjani Kr. Thakur Son of Mathura Prasad Thakur Resident at - Thakur Niwas, Bairiya Bus Stand, P.O. M.I.T., District - Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

State Bank Of India and Ors 2.

The General Manager, State Bank of India, Patna 3.

The Regional Manager, State Bank of India, Patna 4.

The Assistant General Manager, State Bank of India, RASEC CUM - SARC, Poddar Complex Club Road, Mih 5.

The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Muzaffarpur 6.

S.B.I., General Insurance 'Natraj' 101,201, Junction of Western Express Highway and Andheri Kural - 7.

S.B.I. General Insurance Company Limited through Manager, 4th Floor Unit No. 40014002, Grand Plaza, ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Prem Prakash Poddar For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Kaushlendra Kumar Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY ORAL ORDER 23-04-2024 The matter was adjourned from time to time. On 04.04.2024, this Court has passed the oral order which reads as follows:- "The matter is coming up hearing since 08.09.2023 and at the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner it was adjourned on 27.09.2023. On 03.11.2023, 11.01.2024 and 25.01.2024 there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner and this Court directed to list this matter under the caption 'For Dismissal'. On 01.02.2024, learned counsel again sought adjournment on the ground that due to the marriage ceremony in the family of the learned counsel for the petitioner, he was unable to come to

Patna High Court CWJC No.5719 of 2016(10) dt.23-04-2024 2/2 the Court and requested short adjournment.

2. Today also, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner, therefore, as a last indulgence, list this matter on 18.04.2024."

2. Inspite of the said order, today also, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner, therefore, this Court is of the considerable view that the petitioner has no interest evince with the matter.

3. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed for default and for non-prosecution.

(G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J) manishkumar/- U T