High Court of Gujarat

HARSHABEN D/O PREMJIBHAI AJAGIYA W/O SURESHBHAI RATHODversusBINABEN DILIPBHAI MAKWANA

Disposal: 43-DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT @ FH
Bench: C DOSHI

Holding

The appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution as the appellants neither appeared nor were represented by counsel.

Summary

The petitioners, Harshaben D/o Premjibhai Ajagiya w/o Sureshbhai Rathod and others, filed a second appeal against a decree in favor of the respondent, Binaben Dilipbhai Makwana. The appeal was listed multiple times, and while notice was served on several appellants, they either remained absent or were unserved due to incomplete addresses. No advocate appeared on behalf of the absent appellants, and the court observed that the appellants showed no interest in prosecuting the matter further. Consequently, the court held that the appeal could not proceed. The appeal was therefore dismissed for want of prosecution.

Issues considered

Whether a second appeal may be dismissed on the ground of want of prosecution due to the appellants' absence and failure to engage counsel?

Subjects

second appealwant of prosecutionprocedural defaultcivil procedurecourt dismissal

Judgment

               C/SA/86/2017                                                          ORDER DATED: 27/01/2026




                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                                   R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 86 of 2017

    ==========================================================
      HARSHABEN D/O PREMJIBHAI AJAGIYA W/O SURESHBHAI RATHOD &
                                ORS.
                                Versus
                     BINABEN DILIPBHAI MAKWANA
    ==========================================================
    Appearance:
    ADVOCATE NOTICE SERVED for the Appellant(s) No. 3.1,3.2,3.3,4,5
    ADVOCATE NOTICE UNSERVED for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2
    MR NK MAJMUDAR(430) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
    ==========================================================

       CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI

                                                  Date : 27/01/2026

                                                     ORAL ORDER


               The matter is listed on board various times.                                                    Though
    advocate notice is served to the appellants, the appellant Nos.
    3.1,3.2,3.3,4,5 have remained absent through themselves or
    represented by any advocate. Qua appellant Nos.1 and 2, they
    are unserved on the ground of incomplete address. Hence, it
    appears that the appellants are not interested in prosecuting the
    matter any further.                         Hence, present second appeal stands
    dismissed for want of prosecution.



                                                                                                    (J. C. DOSHI,J)
    SHEKHAR P. BARVE


Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: SHEKHAR PRAFULBHAI BARVE(HC00200), Principal Pvt. Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 27/01/2026 14:23:06




                                                          Page 1 of 1

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Try "second appeal"Sign in to search