Much progress appears to have taken piece in the caee:’.;«._4b_’?_he
order sheet, dated 5″‘ 3u¥y, 2003 shows that fie?
adjeurnment was made by the eetitieherfs s¥de”‘aed:v.th’eV’_’samje’
came to be rejected and thereafter the rziietteft~;sée~s::”;2e”stecf”*for
evidence on 25″‘ July, 2008. On eeidhhdahér, t¥1e”,:;’3Ae:i;_i’tEv«:2nef whasi”
absent; on the other hand__two ap;$I’ieeti*e»hs §jhc!erl_S_e?:tior:s 311
and 138(e) and (13) of the Acéhhtteere %
4. when the page eehen the triai is
aeeet te eféthhivevttourt $5 not warranted’ I
have ne ree’seh’–te Trial Ceurt wouid dismiss
the case,if_the’tfeq;§ireh1efivte2St Section 138 of the said Act: are
eat’*co’mei’iecE_’-ewith.Q by tVhe’?e$*apendent.
liberty to the petitioner to raise the issue
ef_nen-ch-mp~i’i:enee of the requirements under Sectien 3.38 of the
h dierhiss this petition.
Sd/-{_
Judge