Sunil Kumar v. Suraj Kumar

$~3 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ C.R.P. 148/2016 and CM No. 33611/2016 (for condonation of delay) SUNIL KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through:

Petitioner in person.

versus SURAJ KUMAR ..... Respondent Through:

None.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA

O R D E R

% 17.05.2018 The petitioner present in person seeks an adjournment on the ground that his counsel is not available. No steps have been taken for the service of notice on the respondent.

On being asked for the reasons, the petitioner shows ignorance.

A conditional order of stay against execution was granted on the last date. On being asked, the petitioner submits that he has not made any deposit in compliance.

It was noted in the last order that there have been series of lapses in taking effective steps for the service of the respondent by the petitioner.

It was made clear in the last order that in case of any further default, the petition would be liable to be dismissed for non prosecution.

In above view, the conditional stay is vacated and the petition and the pending application are dismissed for non prosecution. R.K.GAUBA, J.

MAY 17, 2018/uj