Aashish Kumar vs Ramesh And Ors
2024 Latest Caselaw 9278 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Aashish Kumar vs Ramesh And Ors on 30 April, 2024

Author: Vikas Suri

Bench: Vikas Suri

                                 Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:058994




                                                           2024:PHHC: 058994

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                    AT CHANDIGARH

116                                      RSA-889-2019 (O&M)
                                         Date of decision: 30.04.2024

Aashish Kumar

                                                                 ...Appellant
                  Versus

Ramesh and others
                                                               ...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI

Present:    Mr. Saurabh Dalal, Advocate for the appellant.
                                *****
VIKAS SURI, J. (Oral)

1. On 20.03.2024, the following order was passed:-

"This Regular Second Appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree dated 16.09.2016 and 11.09.2018 passed by the trial Court and lower appellate Court, respectively.

In a suit for possession by way of partition, the trial Court has passed preliminary decree and appeal preferred thereagainst was dismissed by the first appellate Court. More than six years have passed since then. On a query of the Court, learned counsel for the appellant seeks time to have instructions whether the final decree has been passed or not, in the absence of any stay order.

At request, adjourned to 30.04.2024."

2. On resumed hearing today, learned counsel for the appellant

submits that he has not been able to contact his client as his contact

number has changed. He further submits that the counsel who had

represented the appellant before the First Appellate Court, is also not in

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:058994

RSA-889-2019 -2- 2024:PHHC: 058994

touch with the appellant. Learned counsel for the appellant, in the

aforesaid circumstances, pleads no instructions. However, he submits that

the trial Court while decreeing the suit had observed as under:-

"It is made clear that during the passing of final decree the possession of the co sharers will be kept into consideration and as far as possible the final decree would be passed after considering the same."

3. In the light of the above, the present appeal is dismissed for

want of prosecution.

4. However, liberty is granted to the appellant to seek revival of

the same in case any cause of action still survives in the matter.

                                                     (VIKAS SURI)
 April 22, 2024                                         JUDGE
 sumit.k



             Whether speaking/reasoned :              Yes / No
             Whether Reportable :                     Yes / No




                                 2 of 2