Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 1208 P&H
Judgement Date : 19 January, 2024
RSA-277-1995 (O&M) and
XOBJS-17-C-1996 -1- 2024:PHHC:007439
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
201
RSA-277-1995 and
XOBJS-17-C-1996
Date of Decision: 19.01.2024
Maha Singh
.... Appellant
Versus
Surta and others
.... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA
Present: - None.
NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL)
This is the defendant No. 3/appellant's second appeal
against the judgment and decree dated 17.11.1994 passed by the Ist
Appellate Court, vide which the appeal filed by the plaintiff/respondents
No. 1 and 2 herein, was allowed, reversing the judgment and decree
dated 12.08.1993 rendered by the learned trial Court, dismissing their
'suit for declaration'.
Perusal of the file shows that on 18.10.2023, when this case
was listed for hearing, there was no representation on behalf of the
appellant, despite the fact that learned counsel for the appellant had been
duly informed about the date fixed, and the case was adjourned to
04.12.2023. On 04.12.2023, again the appellant had gone un-represented.
Learned counsel appearing for cross-objectors/respondents No. 1 and 2
also pleaded no instructions in the matter and the Registry was directed
to issue actual date of hearing notices to the appellant as well as
respondents No. 1 and 2 for i.e. 20.12.2023.
RSA-277-1995 (O&M) and
XOBJS-17-C-1996 -2- 2024:PHHC:007439
On 20.12.2023, when this case was listed for hearing,
following order has been passed by this Court:
"Perusal of the file shows that vide order dated 04.12.2023, actual date of hearing notices were ordered to the issued to the appellant and respondents No. 1 and 2.
Pursuant thereto, perusal of office report dated 19.12.2023 reveals that (i) notice issued to the sole appellant has been received back duly served; (ii) notice issued to respondent No. 1 has been received back served through his grandson which is a valid service; and (iii) notice issued to respondent No. 2 has been received back with the report 'died'.
However, there is no representation on behalf of either of the parties.
In the interest of justice, adjourned to 19.01.2024."
Today also, despite the case having been called twice, none
has put in appearance on behalf of either of the parties.
In the aforesaid premise, issuance of fresh notice to either of
the parties would be a futile exercise. It appears that due to sheer long
pendency of the present second appeal/cross-objections before this Court
for a period of more than 27 years, both the parties have lost interest in
pursuing the same, as no attempt has been made by them to contact their
previous counsel or to engage a new counsel.
Be that as it may, in view of the foregoing circumstances,
the instant regular second appeal as well as XOBJS-17-C-1996 are
hereby dismissed for non-prosecution.
Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
19.01.2024 ( NIDHI GUPTA )
rishu JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!