IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 215 Paramjit Singh and others Harminder Singh and others CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) appeal against the judgment and decree dated 05.6.2012 passed by the learned District Judge, Rupnagar, whereby the judgment and decree dated 08.1.2011 passed by the learned whereby, the suit filed by the plaintiff was decreed, has been set aside. sought time to bring on record legal representatives of the deceased appellant. Thereafter, it has been repeatedly su counsel for the appellants that they are unable to contact the appellants. The matter was adjourned either on request or due to non representation of learned counsel for the appellants on 03.12.2019, 05.10.2023, 04.1.2024, 10.3.2025 and RSA-4074-2012 (O & M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Regular Second Appeal No.4074 of 2012 Date of decision :-21.04.202 Paramjit Singh and others Versus Harminder Singh and others CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. Sandeep K. Sharma, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. M.S. Longia, Advocate with Mr. Saurabh, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2. NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) The appellants/plaintiffs have filed the present second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 05.6.2012 passed by the learned District Judge, Rupnagar, whereby the judgment and decree dated 08.1.2011 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.) whereby, the suit filed by the plaintiff was decreed, has been set aside. On 23.5.2017, learned counsel for the appellants had sought time to bring on record legal representatives of the deceased appellant. Thereafter, it has been repeatedly su counsel for the appellants that they are unable to contact the appellants. The matter was adjourned either on request or due to non representation of learned counsel for the appellants on 03.12.2019, 05.10.2023, 04.1.2024, 10.3.2025 and 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Regular Second Appeal No.4074 of 2012 (O & M) .2026 …..Appellants …..Respondents HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Sandeep K. Sharma, Advocate Mr. M.S. Longia, Advocate with Mr. Saurabh, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2. The appellants/plaintiffs have filed the present second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 05.6.2012 passed by the learned District Judge, Rupnagar, whereby the judgment and decree Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Ropar, whereby, the suit filed by the plaintiff was decreed, has been set aside. On 23.5.2017, learned counsel for the appellants had sought time to bring on record legal representatives of the deceased- appellant. Thereafter, it has been repeatedly submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that they are unable to contact the appellants. The matter was adjourned either on request or due to non- representation of learned counsel for the appellants on 03.12.2019, 05.10.2023, 04.1.2024, 10.3.2025 and 28.8.2025 including last VIJAY ASIJA 2026.04.24 17.45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document opportunity. Today again learned counsel appearing for the appellants prays for an adjournment on the ground that he was unable to contact the appellants. the above facts casual attitude in the pursuit of the present litigation. It is to be appreciated that very valuable public time of the Court has been expended in affording opportunities to the appellant of justice. On the other hand, the appellant casual and careless approach. It is clear that neither the appellant nor their matter. Thus, this Court is left with no oth dismiss the same for non April 21, 202 Vijay Asija Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable RSA-4074-2012 (O & M) opportunity. Today again learned counsel appearing for the appellants prays for an adjournment on the ground that he was unable to contact the appellants. The matter pertains to the year the above facts shows that the appellant casual attitude in the pursuit of the present litigation. It is to be appreciated that very valuable public time of the Court has been expended in affording opportunities to the appellant of justice. On the other hand, the appellant casual and careless approach. It is clear that neither the appellant counsel are seriously interested in pursuing the present matter. Thus, this Court is left with no oth the same for non-prosecution. Ordered accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. , 2026 Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No 2 opportunity. Today again learned counsel appearing for the appellants prays for an adjournment on the ground that he was unable The matter pertains to the year 2012. A bare reading of shows that the appellants have exhibited an utterly casual attitude in the pursuit of the present litigation. It is to be appreciated that very valuable public time of the Court has been expended in affording opportunities to the appellants in the interest of justice. On the other hand, the appellants have adopted an utterly casual and careless approach. It is clear that neither the appellants counsel are seriously interested in pursuing the present matter. Thus, this Court is left with no other option except to on(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2026.04.24 17.45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document