Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 37271 (PNJ)

RAJINDER GUPTA v. M/S UNITED INDIA INS. CO. LTD.

RSA/2576/1999 · 2025-07-15

Nidhi Gupta

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 204 Rajinder Gupta M/s United CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) concurrent judgments and decrees of the learned Courts below decreeing the suit Rs.1,32,126/ from the appellant/defendant No.2. order was passed by this Court : RSA-2576-1999 (O & M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Regular Second Appeal No.2576 of 1999 Date of decision :-15.07.2025 Rajinder Gupta Versus M/s United India Insurance Company Ltd. and others CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. Manoj Sharma, Advocate and Mr. Tushar, Advocate for Mr. Rajinder Goel, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Nitin Gupta, Respondent No.1. NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) The appellant/defendant No.2 is in concurrent judgments and decrees of the learned Courts below decreeing the suit filed by respondent No.1/plaintif Rs.1,32,126/- and the recovery amount wa from the appellant/defendant No.2. The matter pertains to the year On the last date of hearing i.e.24.3.2025, the following order was passed by this Court :- “As per office report, submitted for 13.1.2025, notice issued to the appellant has been received back with the report that “not residing at given address, resides at Faridabad with family, 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Regular Second Appeal No.2576 of 1999 (O & M) .2025 …..Appellant India Insurance Company Ltd. and others …..Respondents HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Manoj Sharma, Advocate and Mr. Rajinder Goel, Advocate Mr. Nitin Gupta, Respondent No.1. The appellant/defendant No.2 is in 2nd appeal against the concurrent judgments and decrees of the learned Courts below filed by respondent No.1/plaintiff for recovery of the recovery amount was ordered to be recovered The matter pertains to the year 1999. On the last date of hearing i.e.24.3.2025, the following “As per office report, submitted for 13.1.2025, notice issued to the appellant has been received back with the report that “not residing at given address, resides at Faridabad with family, VIJAY ASIJA 2025.07.16 19.35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document has no instructions in the matter last date of hearing i.e. 24.3.2025 states that appel residing at given address”. Clearly, therefore, as appellant has not contacted learned counsel, he is not interested in pursuing the present appeal. Accordingly, prosecution July 15, 202 Vijay Asija Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No RSA-2576-1999 (O & M) however, he has informed telephonically by Process Server”. However representation on behalf of appellant. Since there is no representation on behalf of appellant, in the interest of justice, adjourned to 15.7.2025. Registry to inform learned counsel for the appellant(s) about the date fixed. Fresh notice the appellant be also issued for the date fixed.” Today, learned counsel for the appellant submits that he has no instructions in the matter. Service report with regard to last date of hearing i.e. 24.3.2025 states that appel residing at given address”. Clearly, therefore, as appellant has not contacted learned counsel, he is not interested in pursuing the present appeal. Accordingly, the present appeal prosecution. Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. , 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No 2 however, he has informed telephonically by Process Server”. However, there is no representation on behalf of appellant. Since there is no representation on behalf of appellant, in the interest of justice, adjourned to Registry to inform learned counsel for the appellant(s) about the date fixed. Fresh notice to the appellant be also issued for the date fixed.” earned counsel for the appellant submits that he Service report with regard to the notice issued on the last date of hearing i.e. 24.3.2025 states that appellant is “not residing at given address”. Clearly, therefore, as appellant has not contacted learned counsel, he is not interested in pursuing the present the present appeal is dismissed for non- if any, shall stands disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2025.07.16 19.35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document