IOIN-1-RSA RSA-440-20 IN THE HIG 226-A Dalip Singh Ram Kumar CORAM: H Present: - NIDHI GUP 1. concurrent j whereby the dismissed. 2. this appeal Predecessor 3. letter No. 32 RSA-440-2015 in 2015 (O&M) -1- HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HA IOIN RSA Date o Singh Versus umar and another M: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDH None. I GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The appellant-plaintiff is in rrent judgments and decrees rendere by the suit for permanent injunctio The matter pertains to the year ppeal was listed for hearing, followi essor Bench of this Court:- “Submits that a co-shar house over which the co-sharer should not be disturbed till pendency of partition proceedin deprive the plaintiff from clai possession subject, however, especially when exclusive owne residential house as part of com Admit on questions (ii), ( memo of appeal. Issue notice..” Perusal of office report dated No. 3260 dated 27.07.2021 and 02 e D HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IOIN-1-RSA-440-2015 in RSA-440-2015 (O&M) Date of Decision: 26.11.2025 .… Appellant .... Respondents NIDHI GUPTA is in second appeal against the endered by both the Courts below unction filed by the plaintiff was e year 2015. On 07.04.2015, when ollowing order was passed by the sharer's claim over a residential arers has long settled possession, till partition takes place. Mere eedings would, it is contended, not claiming a right based on long ever, to partition proceedings, ownership was not claimed on the common property. ii), (vi) and (vii) in para. 14 of the dated 29.04.2025 reveals that vide d 02 e-mails dated 02.04.2025 and the low was hen the ial n, re ot gs, he he vide and RISHU KATARIA 2025.11.28 19:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. IOIN-1-RSA RSA-440-20 07.04.2025, necessary ste despite that n Accordingly Category. T 02 times i.e. un-represent also ordered 21.11.2025 reads as und 4. appellant, de appeal is ord 5. the appellan pendency of more than 10 no attempt h RSA-440-2015 in 2015 (O&M) -2- 2025, learned counsel for the appe ary steps for impleading the LRs of de e that no steps have been taken by lear dingly, the present second appeal has . Thereafter, the present second ap es i.e. on 08.05.2025 and 02.09.2025 resented on both the occasions; and rdered to be issued vide order dated 08 2025 (appended with connected app as under:- “Main appeal is admitted. Service report is as under: Resp. No. 1 - Resp. No. 2 - Service report of notice is 02.09.2025 is as under: Sole Appellant - In compliance of ord submitted Ms. Poonam Sharma Sharma, Adv. For the appellan email for the date fixed in the s representing respondent, so far Today, again none has put in ant, despite the case having been cal l is ordered to be taken on Board, for fi In view of the aforesaid premis pellant would be a futile exercise. It a ncy of the present second appeal befo 10 years, the appellant has lost int empt has been made by him to conta appellant was requested to take s of deceased-respondent No. 2, but by learned counsel for the appellant. has been listed under the IOIN nd appeal was listed for hearing for 9.2025, but the appellant had gone and notice to the appellants were 08.05.2025. Office report dated d appeal bearing RSA-431-2015), Duly served. Died. e issued to the appellant for Duly served. order dated 02.09.2025, it is arma, Adv. And Mr. Pandit Vinod ellant has been informed through the said cases. However, no one is far, could not be informed.....” put in appearance on behalf of the en called twice. As such, the main , for final hearing today itself. premise, issuance of fresh notice to se. It appears that due to sheer long al before this Court for a period of lost interest in pursuing the same, as contact his counsel or to engage a take , but lant. IN for one ere ated , for is od gh is the ain e to long d of e, as ge a RISHU KATARIA 2025.11.28 19:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. IOIN-1-RSA RSA-440-20 new counse interested in 6. disposed of application w if so, advised 7. 26.11.2025 rishu RSA-440-2015 in 2015 (O&M) -3- ounsel. It is, therefore, clear that th ted in pursuing the present matter. Be that as it may, the insta ed of, with liberty to the appella ation within a period of 06 weeks from dvised. Pending application(s), if any, s 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable that the appellant is not seriously instant regular second appeal is ppellant to move an appropriate from today for reviving the same, any, shall also stand disposed ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No usly l is riate me, RISHU KATARIA 2025.11.28 19:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.