Patna High Court
Bihar State Electricity Board, PatnaversusM/s Rohtas Industries Ltd., Dalmianagar
- Decided
- Disposal
- D.F.D. FOR NON APPEARANCE
- Bench
- RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA
Holding
The appeal is dismissed for default under Order XLI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Summary
The Bihar State Electricity Board filed a first appeal (No. 25 of 1986) before the Patna High Court, which was heard on 18 June 2026. Neither the appellant nor the respondent appeared, and no counsel was present for either side. Despite a direct notice issued on 8 October 2025, the appellant failed to appear to press the application. The court observed that the appellant had apparently lost interest in contesting the appeal. Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal for default under Order XLI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate consequence when an appellant fails to appear despite notice?
Legislation cited
- Code of Civil Procedure — s. Order XLI Rule 17
Subjects
- default judgment
- civil procedure
- appeal
- non-appearance
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
FIRST APPEAL No.25 of 1986
======================================================
Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
M/s Rohtas Industries Ltd., Dalmianagar P.O.- Dalmia Nagar, Police Station-
Dehri- on- Sone, Sub- Division Sasaram, District- Rohtas.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : None
For the Respondent/s : None
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA
ORAL ORDER
8 18-06-2026 Nobody appears on behalf of both the parties.
2. On 11.09.2025, nobody appears on behalf of the
learned counsel for the appellant, in spite of direct notice has
been issued to the appellant as per office notes dated 08.10.2025
and even today also, nobody appears on behalf of the appellant
to press this application.
3. On perusal of the records, it appears that this First
Appeal is of the year 1986 and the appellant is not present to
contest the present appeal instead of direct notice has been
issued to the appellant.
4. In view of the above circumstances, it appears that
the appellant has lost the interest to contest the present First
Patna High Court FA No.25 of 1986(8) dt.18-06-2026
2/2
Appeal No. 25 of 1986.
5. Accordingly, the present First Appeal No. 25 of
1986 is dismissed for default under Order XLI Rule 17 of the
Code of Civil Procedure.
(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J)
Anand Kr.
U
Checking your session…