IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 205 Prem Chand @ Prem Kumar Municipal Committee, now Municipal Council, Narnaul through its President and another CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) against the concurrent findings of the learned Courts the suit filed by the appellant for dismissed. dated 12.7.2001, chabutra was ordered to be stayed during the pendency of the present appeal. order by co notice issued to the counsel representing the respondents, has been returned with the report, ‘the file has been returned to the parties’. Let fresh notice be issued to the respondents, returnable for RSA-452-2000 (O & M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Regular Second Appeal No.452 of 2000 Date of decision :-03.05.2025 Prem Chand @ Prem Kumar Versus Municipal Committee, now Municipal Council, Narnaul through its President and another CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA None for the appellant. None for the respondents. NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) The present second appeal has been filed by the plaintiff against the concurrent findings of the learned Courts the suit filed by the appellant for permanent injunction has been dismissed. The matter pertains to the year 2000 and vide order d 12.7.2001, while the appeal was admitted, demolition of the chabutra was ordered to be stayed during the pendency of the present As per order dated 27.9.2024 it has been recorded in the order by co-ordinate Bench of this Court that ice issued to the counsel representing the respondents, has been returned with the report, ‘the file has been returned to the parties’. Let fresh notice be issued to the respondents, returnable for 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Regular Second Appeal No.452 of 2000 (O & M) .2025 …..Appellant Municipal Committee, now Municipal Council, Narnaul through …..Respondents HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA has been filed by the plaintiff against the concurrent findings of the learned Courts below whereby permanent injunction has been The matter pertains to the year 2000 and vide order while the appeal was admitted, demolition of the chabutra was ordered to be stayed during the pendency of the present As per order dated 27.9.2024 it has been recorded in the ordinate Bench of this Court that “As per office report, ice issued to the counsel representing the respondents, has been returned with the report, ‘the file has been returned to the parties’. Let fresh notice be issued to the respondents, returnable for VIJAY ASIJA 2025.05.06 18.40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 15.1.2025.” i.e. 15.1.2025 there was no representation on behalf of either of the parties. The office report dated 30.4.2025 shows that learned counsel for the appellants has been informed about the date fixed vide letter No.665 depicts that respondents No.1 and 2 have also been served through clerk. Despite the intimation conveyed to learned counsel for the appellants, nobody is present today on behalf of appellant to represent the appeal, which pertains to t appellant ha present litigation. It is to be appreciated that very valuable public time of the Court has been expended in affording appellant in the interest of justice. On the other hand, the appellant has adopted an utterly casual and careless approach. It is clear that neither the appellant nor pursuing the present matt option except to May 03, 202 Vijay Asija Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No RSA-452-2000 (O & M) 15.1.2025.” The order sheets shows that i.e. 15.1.2025 there was no representation on behalf of either of the parties. The office report dated 30.4.2025 shows that learned counsel for the appellants has been informed about the date fixed vide letter No.665-A dated 28.1.2025. The of depicts that respondents No.1 and 2 have also been served through clerk. Despite the intimation conveyed to learned counsel for the appellants, nobody is present today on behalf of appellant to represent the appeal, which pertains to the year 2000. A bare reading of the above facts shows that the appellant has exhibited an utterly casual attitude in the pursuit of the present litigation. It is to be appreciated that very valuable public time of the Court has been expended in affording appellant in the interest of justice. On the other hand, the appellant adopted an utterly casual and careless approach. It is clear that neither the appellant nor its counsel are seriously interested in pursuing the present matter. Thus, this Court is left with no other option except to dismiss the same for non Ordered accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. , 2025 speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No 2 The order sheets shows that on the last date of hearing i.e. 15.1.2025 there was no representation on behalf of either of the parties. The office report dated 30.4.2025 shows that learned counsel for the appellants has been informed about the date fixed A dated 28.1.2025. The office report further depicts that respondents No.1 and 2 have also been served through clerk. Despite the intimation conveyed to learned counsel for the appellants, nobody is present today on behalf of appellant to he year 2000. A bare reading of the above facts shows that the exhibited an utterly casual attitude in the pursuit of the present litigation. It is to be appreciated that very valuable public time of the Court has been expended in affording opportunities to the appellant in the interest of justice. On the other hand, the appellant adopted an utterly casual and careless approach. It is clear that counsel are seriously interested in er. Thus, this Court is left with no other the same for non-prosecution. Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2025.05.06 18.40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document