Reaffirms the High Court’s inherent power to dismiss appeals for non-prosecution; binding procedural precedent for litigants and practitioners
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | WA(MD)/73/2015 of R.Thirukumar, Vs THE SUB-REGISTRAR, CNR HCMD010884932015 |
| Date of Registration | 06-02-2015 |
| Decision Date | 10-08-2023 |
| Disposal Nature | Dismissed for non-prosecution |
| Judgment Author | Dr. Anita Sumanth, J. |
| Court | Madras High Court, Madurai Bench |
| Bench | Dr. Justice Anita Sumanth; Mr. Justice R. Vijayakumar |
| Concurring Judges | Mr. Justice R. Vijayakumar |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Emphasises that repeated non-appearance of the appellant or their counsel on listing dates justifies dismissal for non-prosecution in writ appeals.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- On 21.07.2023 the appeal was called and the appellant was absent; matter was directed to be listed ‘for dismissal.’
- Though counsel entered appearance on 24.07.2023, the appellant remained unrepresented on the final hearing date.
- Exercising its inherent power under the Letters Patent procedure, the Court dismissed the writ appeal for non-prosecution due to non-appearance.