Delhi High Court
MAC.APP./69/2026 of PAWAN KUMAR MITTAL Vs SMT SUSHILA & ORS. on 25 August 2026
HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC011091722025 + MAC.APP. 69/2026 & CM APPL. 4685/2026, CM APPL. 4686/2026, CM APPL. 4687/2026, CM APPL. 4688/2026 PAWAN KUMAR MITTAL .....Appellant Through: None. versus SMT SUSHILA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.
$~3
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CNR No. DLHC011091722025
+
MAC.APP. 69/2026 & CM APPL. 4685/2026, CM APPL. 4686/2026, CM APPL. 4687/2026, CM APPL. 4688/2026
PAWAN KUMAR MITTAL
.....Appellant
Through:
None.
versus
SMT SUSHILA & ORS.
.....Respondents
Through:
None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
O R D E R
%
25.08.2026
1. No one is present on behalf of the appellant. It is noted that when this matter first came up for hearing on 23rd January 2026, a request was made on behalf of Mr. Anil Verma, counsel for the appellant, on the ground of personal difficulty, and the matter was listed on 26th February 2026.
2. On 26th February 2026, proxy counsel appeared for the appellant and requested an adjournment on account of personal difficulty of the main counsel.
3. The matter was then listed on 17th April 2026, when it could not be taken up in view of the Division Bench Matters. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/09/2026 at 10:58:56
4. On 23rd July 2026, yet again proxy counsel appeared and stated that the main counsel, Mr. Anil Kumar Verma, was not available. At that stage, the Court noted the previous adjournments and stated specifically as under: “5. On the next date of hearing, if Mr. Anil Kumar Verma, counsel, or any other arguing counsel is not available physically in the Court, this matter shall be dismissed for want of prosecution.”
5. Considering that no one is available for the appellant even today, the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.
6. Pending applications are rendered infructuous.
7. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.
ANISH DAYAL, J AUGUST 25, 2026/ak/bp
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/09/2026 at 10:58:56