Allahabad High Court
SMT. RADHA RANIversusSATYA DEO AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- SIDDHARTH NANDAN
Holding
The appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.
Summary
The appellant, Smt. Radha Rani, filed a second appeal before the Allahabad High Court. The court issued a notice on 9 February 2026 directing the appellant to engage new counsel. Despite this, the postal department returned the notice as undeliverable on 8 April 2026. No counsel appeared on behalf of either party, leaving the court without representation to proceed. Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution, noting that the order could be recalled only if an application supported by an affidavit is filed. The dismissal reflects the court's procedural requirement that parties must actively prosecute their appeals.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate course of action when parties fail to appear and no counsel is engaged for an appeal?
Subjects
- appeal
- want of prosecution
- court procedure
- dismissal
- counsel engagement
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
SECOND APPEAL No. - 1585 of 1981
Smt. Radha Rani
.....Appellant(s)
Versus
Satya Deo And Another
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Appellant(s) :
Counsel for Respondent(s) : V.N.Agarwal
Court No. - 38
HON'BLE SIDDHARTH NANDAN, J.
1. Vide order dated 09.02.2026, notice was issued to the appellant to
engage another counsel. However, office has put up a report dated
08.04.2026 that in spite of issuance of notice, the postal department has
returned envelope with an endorsement that the address could not be
found.
2. Since, no one is appearing on behalf of the parties, the Court is left with
no other option but to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution.
However, in case an application supported by an affidavit is filed seeking
recall of the aforesaid order, the same shall be considered accordingly.
(Siddharth Nandan,J.)
April 9, 2026
S.Prakash
Digitally signed by :-
SHASHI PRAKASH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…