Allahabad High Court
SMT. HEM LATA PATHAKversusHARI SHANKAR AND OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The appeal is dismissed for non‑prosecution and failure to furnish the certificate of deposit.
Summary
The appellant, Smt. Hem Lata Pathak, filed a first appeal against an order defective dated 2012. No counsel appeared on behalf of the appellant. The respondent's counsel informed the court that the appeal had been pending since 2012 because the appellant failed to furnish the required certificate of deposit as ordered earlier. The court noted the appellant's non‑prosecution of the appeal and the failure to comply with the certificate requirement. Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal for non‑prosecution and non‑compliance with the earlier order.
Issues considered
- Whether an appeal pending for several years can be dismissed for non‑prosecution
- Whether failure to furnish a certificate of deposit as directed warrants dismissal of the appeal
Subjects
- appeal
- non-prosecution
- certificate of deposit
- order defective
- high court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER DEFECTIVE No. - 695 of 2012
Smt. Hem Lata Pathak
.....Appellant(s)
Versus
Hari Shankar And Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Appellant(s) : Namit Kumar Sharma
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Devendra Kumar, Mahendra Kumar
Maurya
Court No. - 54
HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J.
1. Case called out. None appeared on behalf of the appellant.
2. Sri Mahendra Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the respondent
informed that the defective appeal has been pending since 2012 due to the
failure of the appellant/owner to furnish the certificate of deposit.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution and non-
compliance with the earlier order requiring the appellant/owner to furnish
the certificate of deposit.
September 14, 2026
Vikram
(Anil Kumar-X,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
VIKRAM SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…