IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 204 Smt. Bhagwan Devi and others Azad Singh and others CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned Accident Claims Tribunal, 2001. After arrangement of photocopies of the papers salvaged record the file was reconstructed and taken on Board for hearing on 05.10.2012. Thereafter, three times the matter was taken up before the Court. On 22.5.2018 there was no representation on behalf of any of the parties. On 29.5.2018 it of this Court that the learned counsel representing the appellants had been elevated to the Bench of this Court, therefore, notice to the appellants was issued for 27.7.2018. FAO-2258-2001 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No. 2258 of 2001 (O & M) Date of decision : Smt. Bhagwan Devi and others Versus Azad Singh and others CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. B.S. Mamli, Advocate for the appellants. None for the respondent-Insurance Company. NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) The appellants have filed the present appeal for enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned Accident Claims Tribunal, Faridabad. This is a burnt case and the appeal pertains to the year 2001. After arrangement of photocopies of the papers salvaged record the file was reconstructed and taken on Board for on 05.10.2012. Thereafter, three times the matter was taken up before the Court. On 22.5.2018 there was no representation on behalf of any of the parties. On 29.5.2018 it of this Court that the learned counsel representing the appellants had been elevated to the Bench of this Court, therefore, notice to the appellants was issued for 27.7.2018. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH . 2258 of 2001 (O & M) Date of decision :-26.03.2025 …..Appellants …..Respondents HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Insurance Company. The appellants have filed the present appeal for enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned Motor This is a burnt case and the appeal pertains to the year 2001. After arrangement of photocopies of the papers from the salvaged record the file was reconstructed and taken on Board for on 05.10.2012. Thereafter, three times the matter was taken up before the Court. On 22.5.2018 there was no representation on behalf of any of the parties. On 29.5.2018 it was brought to the notice of this Court that the learned counsel representing the appellants had been elevated to the Bench of this Court, therefore, notice to the VIJAY ASIJA 2025.03.28 19.25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document appellants No.1 to 7 had been received back duly served; whereas appellant No.8 was reported to be died. counsel for the appellants appeared and submitted that despite service of notice on the a received by him to represent the appellants. Thereafter on the same very day i.e. 06.2.2019 the Registry was directed to issue fresh notice to the appellants alongwith a copy of the said order, for 24.4.201 appellants No.1 to 8 had been received back served was no representation on their behalf. 21.3.2025 the Registry has reported that Mr. Sudhir Rana, Advocate for the appellant has been informed vide letter No.1526 dated 06.3.2025; and Mr. Neeraj Khanna, Advocate for the Insurance Company has been informed vide letter appellants submits that despite his best efforts, the appellants are not coming forward to pursue the present appeal and as such, he ple no instructions in the matter. to the appellant sheer long pendency of the present period of more than FAO-2258-2001 As per office report dated 25.7.2018 notice issued appellants No.1 to 7 had been received back duly served; whereas appellant No.8 was reported to be died. On the last date of hearing i.e. on 06.2.2019 learned counsel for the appellants appeared and submitted that despite service of notice on the appellants on 29.5.2018, no instructions had been received by him to represent the appellants. Thereafter on the same very day i.e. 06.2.2019 the Registry was directed to issue fresh notice to the appellants alongwith a copy of the said order, for 24.4.201 As per office report dated 22.4.2019, notice issued to the appellants No.1 to 8 had been received back served was no representation on their behalf. 21.3.2025 the Registry has reported that Mr. Sudhir Rana, Advocate for the appellant has been informed vide letter No.1526 dated 06.3.2025; and Mr. Neeraj Khanna, Advocate for the Insurance Company has been informed vide letter No.1527 dated 06.3.2025. The matter pertains to the year At the very outset, learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that despite his best efforts, the appellants are not coming forward to pursue the present appeal and as such, he ple no instructions in the matter. In the aforesaid premise, issuance of fresh notice to the appellants 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 than 24 years, the appellant 2 As per office report dated 25.7.2018 notice issued to the appellants No.1 to 7 had been received back duly served; whereas On the last date of hearing i.e. on 06.2.2019 learned counsel for the appellants appeared and submitted that despite service ppellants on 29.5.2018, no instructions had been received by him to represent the appellants. Thereafter on the same very day i.e. 06.2.2019 the Registry was directed to issue fresh notice to the appellants alongwith a copy of the said order, for 24.4.2019. As per office report dated 22.4.2019, notice issued to the appellants No.1 to 8 had been received back served, however, there As per office report dated 21.3.2025 the Registry has reported that Mr. Sudhir Rana, Advocate for the appellant has been informed vide letter No.1526 dated 06.3.2025; and Mr. Neeraj Khanna, Advocate for the Insurance No.1527 dated 06.3.2025. The matter pertains to the year 2001. At the very outset, learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that despite his best efforts, the appellants are not coming forward to pursue the present appeal and as such, he pleaded In the aforesaid premise, issuance of fresh notices again would be a futile exercise. It appears that due to ppeal before this Court for a ars, the appellants have lost interest in VIJAY ASIJA 2025.03.28 19.25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document pursuing the same, as no attempt has been made by their counsel or to engage a new counsel. the instant appeal is dismissed for non appellants months from today for reviving the same, if so, advised March 26 Vijay Asija Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No FAO-2258-2001 pursuing the same, as no attempt has been made by counsel or to engage a new counsel. Be that as it may, in view of the foregoing circumstances, the instant appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution, with liberty to the appellants, to move an appropriate application within a period of 0 months from today for reviving the same, if so, advised Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. 6, 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No 3 pursuing the same, as no attempt has been made by them to contact Be that as it may, in view of the foregoing circumstances, prosecution, with liberty to the , to move an appropriate application within a period of 04 months from today for reviving the same, if so, advised. Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2025.03.28 19.25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document