THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.N. RAO NALLA C.M.A.No. 304 OF 2004 JUDGMENT: A perusal of the record shows that the C.M.A. was dismissed for default twice, firstly on 20.3.2006 and secondly on 9.4.2009. On petitions being filed by the appellant, the default order was set aside both the times. Thereafter, respondent No.1 filed a petition to fix an early date for hearing the appeal and the same was ordered directing the Registry to post the appeal under the caption “For Final Hearing”. On 10.11.2009, when the matter was called, none appeared for the appellant and the matter was adjourned. Even today, when the mater is called, none appears for the appellant and no representation. It appears the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal any further. 2) Therefore, the C.M.A. is dismissed for non-prosecution. No order as to costs. ______________________ B.N. RAO NALLA, J 4th September, 2012 CHV