- (1.) When this case is taken up for hearing, request is made for an adjournment on behalf of counsel for the petitioner. State counsel, on the other hand, on instructions, points out that investigation in this case has been stayed. No doubt, while admitting this petition on 15.12.2005, further proceedings were stayed and direction was issued for hearing the petition within one year. However, this petition subsequently came up for hearing on 19.9.2006, when the office submitted a report that respondent No.2 has not been served as no person by such name resides in the village.
(2.) None had appeared on behalf of the petitioner on that day. The case was adjourned to 26.9.2006 with a direction that counsel for the petitioner be informed about the adjourned date. Again, the case was adjourned to 6.11.2006.
(3.) Ultimately, none appeared for the petitioner on 11.5.2007 and the case was then adjourned sine-die and the interim order, staying the proceedings, was vacated.;