IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 209 Raj Singh Sahab Singh and CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) and decree dated 22.2.2001 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Rohtak whereby the judgment and decree dated 20.4.1998 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Rohtak passed in favour of the plaintiff has been set aside. and 22.5.2025 there was no representation on behalf of appellant. been received back unserved due to insufficient addr appellant would be a futile exercise. It appears that due to sheer long pendency of the present RSA-1299-2001 (O & M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Regular Second Appeal No.1299 of 2001 Date of decision :-22.07.2025 Raj Singh Versus Sahab Singh and others CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA None for the appellant. Ms. Meenakshi Sharma, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 3. NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) The appellant-plaintiff is in appeal against the judgment decree dated 22.2.2001 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Rohtak whereby the judgment and decree dated 20.4.1998 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Rohtak passed in favour of the plaintiff has been set aside. The matter pertains to the year 2001. As per order sheets from the last two dates i.e.06.3.2025 and 22.5.2025 there was no representation on behalf of appellant. As per office report, notice issued to the appellant has been received back unserved due to insufficient addr In the aforesaid premise, issuance of fresh notice to the appellant would be a futile exercise. It appears that due to sheer long pendency of the present appeal before this Court for a period of more 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Regular Second Appeal No.1299 of 2001 (O & M) .2025 …..Appellant …..Respondents HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Ms. Meenakshi Sharma, Advocate plaintiff is in appeal against the judgment decree dated 22.2.2001 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Rohtak whereby the judgment and decree dated 20.4.1998 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Rohtak passed in favour to the year 2001. As per order sheets from the last two dates i.e.06.3.2025 and 22.5.2025 there was no representation on behalf of appellant. As per office report, notice issued to the appellant has been received back unserved due to insufficient address. In the aforesaid premise, issuance of fresh notice to the appellant would be a futile exercise. It appears that due to sheer long ppeal before this Court for a period of more VIJAY ASIJA 2025.07.24 17.29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document than 24 years, the appellant ha no attempt has been made by a new counsel. the instant appeal is an appropriate for reviving the same, if so, advised. July 22, 202 Vijay Asija Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No RSA-1299-2001 (O & M) years, the appellant has lost interest in no attempt has been made by him to contact his counsel or to engage a new counsel. Be that as it may, in view of the foregoing circumstances, the instant appeal is disposed of, with liberty to the an appropriate application within a period of 0 for reviving the same, if so, advised. Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. , 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Reportable Yes / No 2 lost interest in pursuing the same, as to contact his counsel or to engage Be that as it may, in view of the foregoing circumstances, , with liberty to the appellant, to move application within a period of 02 months from today Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2025.07.24 17.29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document