Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

1998 DAILYLAW 1 (PNJ)

N.I.CO. LTD. v. M/S AGGL. METAL CO.

RSA/679/1998 · 2026-04-06

Amarinder Singh Grewal

body1998

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

RSA-679-1998(O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (203) RSA-679-1998(O&M) Date of Decision:-06.04.2026 National Insurance Company ……Appellant Versus M/s Aggarwal Metal Company ……Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL **** Present: None for the appellant. **** AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL, J. (Oral) 1. There is no representation on behalf of the appellant. 2. A perusal of the record reveals that on the previous date of hearing, learned counsel for the appellant had submitted that he had no instructions from the appellant and had prayed for issuance of notice to the appellant–Insurance Company. Accordingly, notice was issued. As per the report of the Registry, the said notice has been received back duly served through Clerk. Despite service, none has put in appearance on behalf of the appellant today. 3. It is further evident from the record that on several earlier dates of hearing, the matter had been adjourned for furnishing the correct and current address of the respondent(s). However, despite specific and repeated directions issued by this Court, learned counsel for the appellant has failed to comply with the same. No effective steps have been taken to pursue the present appeal. Even today, there is complete non-appearance on -1- SHUBHAM 2026.04.08 10:43 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/order RSA-679-1998(O&M) behalf of the appellant. The conduct of the appellant, as reflected from the proceedings, clearly indicates lack of interest in prosecuting the present appeal. 4. In the aforesaid circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the present appeal pending on the docket of this Court for an indefinite period, particularly when the appellant has failed to show any diligence in pursuing the matter. 5. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed in default for want of prosecution. 6. However, liberty is granted to the appellant to seek revival of the appeal in accordance with law, if any sufficient cause survives for consideration. 7. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL) JUDGE 06.04.2026 Shubham Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether Reportable:- Yes/No -2- SHUBHAM 2026.04.08 10:43 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/order