(O&M) Naveen Chand Jain vs Kailash Chand Mangla And Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 7049 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

(O&M) Naveen Chand Jain vs Kailash Chand Mangla And Others on 3 April, 2024

                                    Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:044728



                                                              2024:PHHC:044728
      IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT
                     CHANDIGARH

129                                                               RSA-120-1991
                                                    Date of Decision: 03.04.2024

NAVEEN CHAND JAIN
                                                                     ... Appellant
                                    VERSUS

KAILASH CHAND MANGLA AND OTHERS
                                                                  ... Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ.
                                        ****

Present:    Mr. Aman Priye Jain, Advocate
            for the appellant.

            Mr. Adarsh Jain and Ms. Kamaldeep Kaur,
            Advocates for the respondents.
                                    ****
VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (ORAL)

The appellant-defendant is in second appeal against the judgment

and decree dated 31.05.1989 passed by the Sub Judge IInd Class, Palwal in

Civil Suit No.539 of 1986 dated 11.08.1986 whereby the suit for possession by

ejectment and recovery of Rs.3300/- was decreed with costs in favour of the

respondent-plaintiff. A decree for ejectment of the appellant-defendant from the

shop in dispute and for recovery of Rs.2,000/- alongwith interest @ 6% per

annum was passed by the Sub Judge, IInd Class, Palwal. Appeal against the

same had also been dismissed by the Addl. District Judge, Faridabad vide

judgment and decree dated 22.11.1990.

Counsel for the appellant-defendant pleads that the appellant-

defendant is no more in contact with him and that despite best efforts no

instructions are forthcoming.

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:044728

RSA-120-1991 -2- 2024:PHHC:044728

Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-plaintiff, on the

other hand, submits that the decree in question has already been satisfied in the

Execution Proceedings. Actual possession of the property has also been

delivered to the respondent-plaintiff.

In view of the above, it is evident that the appellant-defendant is

not interested in pursuing the case and is not issuing any instructions to the

counsel appearing on his behalf.

Dismissed for non-prosecution.

                                                    (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ)
APRIL 03, 2024                                            JUDGE
rajender


                   Whether speaking/reasoned         : Yes/No
                   Whether reportable                : Yes/No




                                   2 of 2