Krishna Sengar v. Chandrapal Singh Sengar
$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAT.APP.(F.C.) 67/2017 KRISHNA SENGAR ..... Appellant Through:
Mr.Sarthak Bhatia, Advocate.
versus CHANDRAPAL SINGH SENGAR ..... Respondent Through:
None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL
O R D E R
% 09.07.2018 This is an appeal against the judgment dated 09.11.2016 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Rohini, by which the marriage between the parties have been dissolved under Section 13(1) (i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
The appeal was listed for the first time on 18.04.2017 and adjourned for 08.05.2017 as counsel for the appellant had sought time to prepare the matter. On 08.05.2017, an adjournment was sought to file certain documents which were not filed before the Family Court. The matter was then adjourned to 12.07.2017 and thereafter adjourned to 16.08.2017. On 16.08.2017, the Court was informed that the documents filed by the appellant were lying under objections. Counsel for the appellant had also stated that she has been recently engaged in the case and the matter was then adjourned to 09.10.2017. On the next date of hearing, it was observed in the order dated 09.10.2017 that the objections had not been removed and the documents were still lying in the registry. The Court then adjourned the
matter for 14.11.2017. Again an adjournment was sought on behalf of the appellant on 14.11.2017 when the matter was adjourned to 06.03.2018. On 06.03.2018 the counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant had stated that he has no instructions to prosecute the present appeal. The Court had then issued notice to the appellant for 03.07.2018. On 03.07.2018, this Court had passed the following order:
"There has been no progress in the matter since 18.04.2017 and is being adjourned at the request of the counsel for the appellant. On the last date of hearing, counsel for the appellant had stated that he had no instructions in the matter and accordingly court notice was issued to the appellant. Today again, an adjournment is sought by the counsel on the ground that he has been recently engaged in the matter. In the interest of justice, adjourned to 09.07.2018. We make it clear that no adjournment would be granted on any reason or on any ground".
Today again Mr.Bhatia, counsel for the appellant submits that he has not received the Vakalatnama. We left with no option but to dismiss the present appeal for non prosecution.
Accordingly, the present appeal along with pending applications are dismissed for non prosecution.
G. S. SISTANI, J SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J JULY 09, 2018 afa MAT.APP.(F.C.) 67/2017