Heera Singh vs Raj Singh & Ors
2024 Latest Caselaw 7806 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Heera Singh vs Raj Singh & Ors on 15 April, 2024

                                  Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:049828



                                 Neutral Citation No. 2024:PHHC:049828

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                    AT CHANDIGARH
126
                                                      RSA-2457-1993
                                          Date of decision: 15.04.2024

HEERA SINGH                                                 .........Petitioner

                                VERSUS


RAJ SINGH & OTHERS                                      ........Respondents

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

                           *****
Present:-   None for the appellant.

            Mr. Chander Pal Tiwana, Advocate for
            Mr. R.S. Chahar, Advocate
            for respondents No. 1 to 3.

                             *****

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

The plaintiff is in appeal against the judgment and decree

dated 27.09.1993 passed by the Additional District Judge, Rohtak in

Civil Appeal No. 90 of 1992 whereby the appeal filed by the

respondents-defendants had been allowed and the judgment and decree

dated 30.09.1992 passed by the Additional Senior Sub Judge, Jhajjar

had been set aside.

It was noticed by this Court on 24.11.2023 that an

application had been filed by the appellant for withdrawing the amount

that was deposited pursuant to the decree of the trial Court and without

prejudice to the rights in the appeal vide order dated 28.01.1994. A

contention of the respondents was also noticed to the effect that the

claim of the appellant would not survive in lieu of the provisions of

Section 22 (5) (a) of the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1913. However, it

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:049828

Neutral Citation No. 2024:PHHC:049828

RSA-2457-1993 -2-

was noticed that the Advocate representing the appellant had since then

passed away. It was accordingly directed that notice be issued to the

appellant for today.

It has been reported by the Registry that the sole appellant

has also died. There is no representation by the LRs of the appellant

despite being aware of the pendency of the present appeal. It seems that

they are no more interested in pursuing the present Regular Second

Appeal.

Dismissed for non-prosecution.

(VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) JUDGE APRIL 15, 2024 Vishal sharma

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

2 of 2