RSA-3074- IN THE HIG 206 Smt. Resham Sube Singh a CORAM: H Present: - NIDHI GUP 1. judgments a suit for mand 2. sheet(s) reve 29.05.2012, appearance o the main ap subsequent appellant ha present seco time on acco vide order d number upon hearing 05.0 the sole appe -2011 (O&M) -1- E HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HA RSA Date o esham through her LRs. Versus ingh and another M: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDH None. I GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The appellant-plaintiff is in sec ents and decrees rendered by both th mandatory injunction filed by the pla The matter pertains to the yea s) reveal(s) that on the first 02 date o 2012, the present appeal was adjo rance on behalf of the appellant; and n ain appeal vide order dated 12.09.2 uent 02 dates of hearing i.e. 09.0 had gone un-represented; and th t second appeal was dismissed for n account of non-appearance on beha rder dated 07.07.2014, the main appe r upon an application moved by the a 05.08.2014, learned counsel for the le appellant in the present appeal had ND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA-3074-2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 09.12.2025 .… Appellant(s) .... Respondent NIDHI GUPTA in second appeal against concurrent oth the Courts below whereby the the plaintiff was dismissed. e year 2011. Perusal of the order- date of hearing i.e. 19.09.2011 and s adjourned on account of non- ; and notice of motion was issued in .09.2012. However, again on the . 09.01.2013 and 08.04.2013, the and thereafter, on 01.05.2014, the d for non-prosecution for the first n behalf of appellant. Subsequently, n appeal was restored to its original y the appellant. On the next date of for the appellant had informed that al had passed away and sought time rent the and d in the the first ntly, inal e of that time RISHU KATARIA 2025.12.10 18:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. RSA-3074- to implead 04.11.2014, another oppo file applicati the situation second appe the said date 3. appellant, th dated 30.06. many as for request of 05.11.2019 one year. 03.03.2022, office to lis 21.04.2022 dates of hea adjourned in learned coun 4. appellant(s) 5. have exhibit litigation. It -2011 (O&M) -2- plead her legal representative(s). O 2014, none had put in appearance on r opportunity was granted to learned plication for impleading the LRs of d uation on the next date i.e. 21.04.2015 appeal was dismissed for non-prosec id date. Again, upon an application mov ant, the main appeal was restored to i 30.06.2015. Thereafter, the present ap as for 07 times and most of the times t t of learned counsel for the respo 2019, the main appeal was admitted a ear. The Predecessor Bench of th 2022, upon an application moved b to list the main appeal for final dis 2022. Further, perusal of order-sheet of hearing i.e. 09.09.2024 and 03.03. ned in terms of written request fo d counsel for the appellant(s). Today, none has put in ap (s), despite the case having been cal A bare reading of the above fac exhibited an utterly casual attitude in ion. It is not for this Court to be chasi (s). On the next date of hearing nce on behalf of the appellant and earned counsel for the appellant to s of deceased-appellant. Similar is 4.2015 and accordingly, the present prosecution for the second time on n moved by learned counsel for the ed to its original number vide order ent appeal was listed for hearing as times the same was adjourned at the respondent(s). Vide order dated itted and ordered to be listed within of this Court vide order dated ved by the appellant directed the nal disposal in motion hearing for sheet(s) shows that on the last 02 03.03.2025, the present appeal was est for adjournment circulated by in appearance on behalf of the een called twice. facts shows that the appellant(s) tude in their pursuit of the present asing recalcitrant parties or their ring and t to ar is sent on r the rder g as t the ated ithin ated the for t 02 was by the nt(s) sent their RISHU KATARIA 2025.12.10 18:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. RSA-3074- counsel to a vintage as th of the Cou opportunities other hand, approach. It ld. counsel Moreover, e prosecution orders dated other option time. 6. 7. 09.12.2025 rishu/Kusum -2011 (O&M) -3- el to argue the matter before the C e as the present one. It is to be appreci e Court cannot be whiled away tunities to lackadaisical litigants in th hand, the appellant(s) have adopted a ch. It is clear that neither the appella unsel are seriously interested in p ver, earlier the present second appe cution 02 times by the Predecessor dated 01.05.2014 and 21.04.2015. option except to dismiss the same for Ordered accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, s 2025 sum Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable the Court; especially of such old ppreciated that valuable public time away in affording innumerable in the interest of justice. On the pted an utterly casual and careless ppellant(s), nor the respondents, or in pursuing the present matter. d appeal was dismissed for non- cessor Bench(s) of this Court vide Thus, this Court is left with no e for non-prosecution for the third any, shall also stand disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No old time able the less s, or vide h no RISHU KATARIA 2025.12.10 18:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.