Hasim Mansuri v. Satish Kumar Adya

$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RFA 917/2016 & C.M. No. 43843/2016 (stay) HASIM MANSURI ..... Appellant Through: None.

versus SATISH KUMAR ADYA ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Geeta, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI

O R D E R

% 08.03.2017 1.

On the first call, none was present on behalf of the appellant/defendant. In the interest of justice, the matter was passed over. The position remains the same even on the second call. 2.

A perusal of the order sheets shows that on 25.11.2016, an interim order was granted in favour of the appellant/defendant subject to his depositing the entire decretal amount with upto date interest within six weeks. As per the Registry, the appellant/defendant has failed to deposit any amount. Further, none had appeared on behalf of the appellant/defendant before the learned Registrar (Appellate) on 23.1.2017 and 03.3.2017. 3.

It appears that the appellant/defendant is not interested in prosecuting the present appeal, which is accordingly dismissed in default and for non- prosecution along with pending application. HIMA KOHLI, J MARCH 08, 2017/ap