ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.2 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSIA 3/2012 inPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal Civil)....../2011 CC 15356/2011(From the judgement and order dated 20/12/2010 in SA No.173/2007,of The HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL)LAKSMAN DAS Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF U.P.& ORS. Respondent(s)( for restoration and office report ))Date: 27/01/2012 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALTAMAS KABIR HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE GYAN SUDHA MISRAFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Mohan Pandey,AOR.(Not Present)For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Despite the fact that this is an application for restoration of the Special Leave Petition, even in the second call, there is no one present. I.A.3 of 2012 is dismissed, accordingly, for default.(Sheetal Dhingra) (Renuka Sadana) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
\234ITEM NO.8 Court No.8 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2011 CC 15356/2011(From the judgement and order dated 20/12/2010 in SA No.173/2007 of The HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL)LAKSMAN DAS Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF U.P.& ORS. Respondent(s)with I.A. No. 1 (c/delay in filing SLP, c/delay in refilingSLP,permission to file additional documentsDate: 28/11/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CYRIAC JOSEPH HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE GYAN SUDHA MISRAFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Mohan Pandey,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Though a letter has been circulated on behalf of the petitioner stating that the arguing counsel for the petitioner will be seeking adjournment for four weeks due to some personal difficulty. When the case is called, there is no body to represent the petitioner or to seek adjournment. Hence, the special leave petition is dismissed for default. (Shashi Sareen) (Renuka Sadana) Court Master Court Master