RSA-1460- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 207 Amar Singh and others Krishan and CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present: - NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) judgment and decree dated District Judge No. 1/respondent decree dated (Senior Division), before the Daily Lok Adalat Bench No. 1 on 15.03.2024 an order was passed: -2001 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA Date of Decision: Amar Singh and others Versus Krishan and others CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Ms. Kompal Arora, Advocate for Mr. BR Gupta, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Ranjit Saini, Advocate for the respondents. NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The plaintiff-appellants are judgment and decree dated 28.02.2001 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Fatehabad, vide which the appeal filed by the respondent No. 1 herein was allowed reversing the judgment and decree dated 10.11.1998, passed by the learned (Senior Division), Fatehabad. The matter pertains to the year before the Daily Lok Adalat Bench No. 1 on 15.03.2024 an order was passed:- “Notices issued to the appellants received back with the report that appellant Nos. 1 to 5 and 14 have been duly served and appellant Nos. 6 to 12 have already expired. Notice issued to appellant No. 13 received back unserve However, only appellant Nos. 1 and 14 had come present on the last date of hearing. L.Rs of deceased appellants are to record. Hence, there is no possibility of compromise in this case in Lok, Adalat. The same is sent back to the Hon’ble High Court for adjudication.” IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA-1460-2001 (O&M) Date of Decision: 28.04.2025 .… Appellants .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA . Kompal Arora, Advocate for Mr. BR Gupta, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Ranjit Saini, Advocate for the respondents. in second appeal against the passed by the learned Additional , vide which the appeal filed by the defendant was allowed reversing the judgment and , passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge The matter pertains to the year 2001 and was lastly listed before the Daily Lok Adalat Bench No. 1 on 15.03.2024 and following “Notices issued to the appellants received back with the report that appellant Nos. 1 to 5 and 14 have been duly served and appellant Nos. 6 to 12 have already expired. Notice issued to appellant No. 13 received back unserved. However, only appellant Nos. 1 and 14 had come present on L.Rs of deceased appellants are to be brought on record. Hence, there is no possibility of compromise in this case in Lok, Adalat. The same is sent back to the Hon’ble High Court for adjudication.” in second appeal against the passed by the learned Additional was allowed reversing the judgment and Civil Judge 1 and was lastly listed d following “Notices issued to the appellants received back with the report that appellant Nos. 1 to 5 and 14 have been duly served and appellant Nos. 6 to 12 have already expired. d. However, only appellant Nos. 1 and 14 had come present on e brought on record. Hence, there is no possibility of compromise in this case in Lok, Adalat. The same is sent back to the Hon’ble RISHU KATARIA 2025.04.29 19:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. RSA-1460- submits that her clients accordingly, pray appellants pendency of the present second appeal before this Court for a period of more than 24 as no attempt has been made by a new counsel. instant regular second appeal is liberty to the appellant period of 0 28.04.2025 rishu -2001 (O&M) -2- Learned counsel appearing for the submits that despite her best efforts, she is unable to establish contact with s as such, she pleaded no instructions in the matter. accordingly, prayed that let fresh notices to the appellants may be issued. In the aforesaid premise, issuance of fresh notice would be a futile exercise. It appears that due to sheer long pendency of the present second appeal before this Court for a period of 24 years, the appellants have lost interest in pursuing the same, as no attempt has been made by him to contact a new counsel. Be that as it may, in view of the foregoing circumstances, the instant regular second appeal is dismissed for non liberty to the appellants, to move an appropriate application within a 03 months from today for reviving the same, if so, advised. Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. .2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable earned counsel appearing for the plaintiff-appellants he is unable to establish contact with pleaded no instructions in the matter. It is let fresh notices to the appellants may be issued. In the aforesaid premise, issuance of fresh notices to the would be a futile exercise. It appears that due to sheer long pendency of the present second appeal before this Court for a period of lost interest in pursuing the same, to contact their counsel or to engage Be that as it may, in view of the foregoing circumstances, the dismissed for non-prosecution, with to move an appropriate application within a months from today for reviving the same, if so, advised. Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No he is unable to establish contact with It is the would be a futile exercise. It appears that due to sheer long pendency of the present second appeal before this Court for a period of lost interest in pursuing the same, counsel or to engage Be that as it may, in view of the foregoing circumstances, the with to move an appropriate application within a RISHU KATARIA 2025.04.29 19:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.