IN TH 116 Jawahar L Pushpinde CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GU Court :- RSA-885-2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGAR Regular Second Appeal No.88 Date of decision :-11.05.202 har Lal ….. Versus pinder Kumar AM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NI Mr. Sandeep Siwach, Advocat Mr. Preetwinder Singh Dhaliw for the applicant-appellant. HI GUPTA J. (Oral) On 12.8.2025, the following “1. The appellant-pl against the concurren rendered both the Cou for declaration and p dismissed. 2. The matter perta notice in the main appea 3. Perusal of the o since the inception of p same was repeatedly ad of non-appearance on on 05.08.2019, 25.0 04.09.2024; or at the for the appellant on 0 and 14.01.2025 (last da 1 UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH No.885 of 2019 (O & M) .2026 …..Applicant-Appellant …..Respondent E NIDHI GUPTA dvocate for haliwal, Advocate owing order was passed by this plaintiff is in second appeal rrent judgments and decrees Courts below whereby the suit nd permanent injunction was pertains to the year 2015 and ppeal is yet to be issued. the order-sheet(s) reveals that of present second appeal, the ly adjourned either on account on behalf of the appellant i.e. 25.09.2023, 23.02.2024 and the request of learned counsel n 02 dates i.e. on 07.05.2024 st date of hearing). VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.13 12.11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document application appeal. O application RSA-885-2019 4. Today, in the fi Supneet Singh, Advoca Advocate had appeared and sought a pass-ove round none has put in a appellant. 5. A bare reading o the appellant has ex attitude in his pursuit o to be appreciated that v the Court has been opportunities to the ap justice. On the other adopted an utterly casu It is clear that neith counsel is seriously i present matter. Thus, other option except t appeal, for non-prosecu 6. Ordered accordin 7. Pending applicat disposed of.” Thereafter, the applicant- cation bearing CM-11312-C-2025 fo al. On 17.9.2025, the following ord cation :- “Prayer in this Order XLI Rule 19 rea for restoration of the m which was dismissed order dated 12.08.2025 2 e first round of hearing, Mr. vocate for Mr. PS Dhaliwal, ared on behalf of the appellant over. However, in the second t in appearance on behalf of the ng of the above facts shows that exhibited an utterly casual uit of the present litigation. It is hat very valuable public time of been expended in affording e appellant in the interest of ther hand, the appellant has casual and careless approach. either the appellant nor his ly interested in pursuing the us, this Court is left with no pt to dismiss present second secution. ordingly. lication(s), if any, shall stands -appellant has moved an 025 for restoration of the main ng order was passed in the said this application filed under read with Section 151 CPC is e main appeal (RSA-885-2019) sed for non-prosecution vide 025. VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.13 12.11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document applicant- messages s order dated regarding d neither res comply wit applicant- casual. The order dated non-appear RSA-885-2019 Heard. For the reas application which is su learned counsel for th same is allowed; and t to be restored to its o costs of ₹30,000/- to be within a period of 02 Savings Bank Account State Legal Services Fund" bearing Accoun Code: SBIN0014656, S 68, SAS Nagar for 20 Floods Relief in the Stat Subject to compl list the main appea 11.05.2026.” Today, learned counsel app -appellant submits that despite re ages sent to the applicant-appellant r dated 17.9.2025 and requiring him to rding deposit of costs of ₹30,000/-, t er responded to the communication ly with the aforesaid order. Heard. A perusal of the record revea -appellant throughout has remai al. The main appeal itself was dismisse r dated 12.8.2025 after this Court no appearance and lack of diligence on 3 reasons mentioned in the is supported by an affidavit of r the applicant-appellant, the nd the main appeal is ordered its original number, subject to o be deposited by the appellant f 02 weeks from today in the ount under the name "Punjab ices Authority-Disaster Relief count No. 44426937384, IFSC 6, State Bank of India, Sector- r 2025 to be used for '2025 State of Punjab'. ompliance, Registry is directed ppeal for final hearing on el appearing on behalf of the pite repeated telephonic calls and ellant informing him about the him to comply with the condition , the applicant-appellant has ications nor taken any steps to reveals that the conduct of the remained wholly negligent and ismissed for non-prosecution vide urt noticed repeated instances of ce on the part of the appellant. VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.13 12.11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Despite the vide order conditional period of tw equities, to ensure serio of proceed with such basis upon appellant h stated by le responding Such condu is not intere discretiona diligence a from the indifferent proceeding instance o process of l RSA-885-2019 ite the indulgence shown by this Co order dated 17.9.2025, the restorati itional upon deposit of costs of ₹30 d of two weeks. The condition imposed by t ies, to compensate for wastage of va re seriousness on the part of the litigan roceedings earlier dismissed for non such condition was, therefore, mand upon which the restoration had been g However, despite lapse of sub llant has failed to comply with the sa d by learned counsel himself, the app nding to repeated communications m conduct leaves no manner of doubt t t interested in pursuing the present app It is well settled that a litigan etionary relief from the Court must ence and bona fides. A party cannot the Court and thereafter continue ferent towards compliance of eedings cannot be permitted to remain nce of litigants who exhibit compl ess of law and orders passed by the Co 4 is Court by restoring the appeal storation was consciously made ₹30,000/- within a stipulated by this Court was to balance of valuable judicial time and to litigant while seeking restoration or non-prosecution. Compliance mandatory and formed the very been granted. of substantial time, the applicant- the said order. Not only this, as e applicant-appellant is not even tions made by his own counsel. doubt that the applicant-appellant nt appeal. litigant who seeks equitable and must approach the Court with annot repeatedly seek indulgence ntinue to remain negligent and of judicial orders. Judicial emain pending indefinitely at the complete disregard towards the the Court. VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.13 12.11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document appeal pert yet been is to the appe repeatedly appeal once clearly dise of. May 11, 20 Vijay Asija Whether spea Whether Repo RSA-885-2019 It is further pertinent to not al pertains to the year 2015 and even n en issued on account of the repeated e appellant. Valuable judicial time has atedly accommodating the applicant al once despite earlier dismissal for no In the considered opinion of ly disentitle the appellant from any fur Accordingly, the main appeal s Pending application(s), if any , 2026 r speaking/reasoned Yes / No r Reportable Yes / No 5 to note that the present second even notice in the appeal has not peated defaults attributable solely me has already been consumed in icant-appellant and restoring the for non-prosecution. on of this Court, the above facts ny further indulgence. ppeal stands dismissed. if any, shall also stand disposed ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.13 12.11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document