PB NATIONAL BANK v. M/S DEEPAK CHEMICAL WORKS AND OTHERS
RSA/4275/2001 · 2025-08-27
Virinder Aggarwal
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 43358 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 43358 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
(207)
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK
M/S DEEPAK CHEMICAL WORKS AND OTHERS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL
Present:- None for the appellant. Mr. B.R. Mahajan, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Daanish Mahajan, Advocate, and Mr. Mayank Vashisht, Advocate, for respondent No.6. **** VIRINDER AGGARWAL
1. On the previous date of hearing, none has appeared on behalf of the appellant/bank, so notice was served upon the appellant/bank but today, again none has appeared on behalf of the appellant in the pre over and when it was taken up after lunch, again none has present on behalf of the appellant/bank, so it seems that appellant/bank is not interested in pursuing the appeal. 2. In view of the above and given the prevailing circumstances, there seems to be no justification to keep the appeal on the docket, indefinitely. Accordingly, the instant appeal stands dismissed for want of prosecution with liberty to the appellants to revive the same, if have any grievance from this order, within a period of three months from today. 3. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, are also disposed of accordingly
27.08.2025 S. Pathania
Whether reasoned / speaking? Whether reportable? IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
RSA
Date of Decision:
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK
Versus M/S DEEPAK CHEMICAL WORKS AND OTHERS
-.- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL None for the appellant. Mr. B.R. Mahajan, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Daanish Mahajan, Advocate, and Mr. Mayank Vashisht, Advocate, for respondent No.6. **** VIRINDER AGGARWAL, J. (Oral) On the previous date of hearing, none has appeared on behalf of the appellant/bank, so notice was served upon the appellant/bank but today, again none has appeared on behalf of the appellant in the pre-lunch sessions, so the matter was passed it was taken up after lunch, again none has present on behalf of the appellant/bank, so it seems that appellant/bank is not interested in pursuing the appeal. In view of the above and given the prevailing circumstances, there seems ation to keep the appeal on the docket, indefinitely. Accordingly, the instant appeal stands dismissed for want of prosecution with liberty to the appellants to revive the same, if have any grievance from this order, within a period of three months Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, are also disposed of
(VIRINDER AGGARWAL)
Whether reasoned / speaking? Yes / No Whether reportable?
Yes / No IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
RSA-4275-2001 Date of Decision:-27.08.2025
… Appellant
... Respondents HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL Mr. B.R. Mahajan, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Daanish Mahajan, Advocate, and Mr. Mayank Vashisht, Advocate, for On the previous date of hearing, none has appeared on behalf of the appellant/bank, so notice was served upon the appellant/bank but today, again none has lunch sessions, so the matter was passed it was taken up after lunch, again none has present on behalf of the appellant/bank, so it seems that appellant/bank is not interested in pursuing the appeal. In view of the above and given the prevailing circumstances, there seems ation to keep the appeal on the docket, indefinitely. Accordingly, the instant appeal stands dismissed for want of prosecution with liberty to the appellants to revive the same, if have any grievance from this order, within a period of three months Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, are also disposed of (VIRINDER AGGARWAL) JUDGE Yes / No Yes / No
On the previous date of hearing, none has appeared on behalf of the appellant/bank, so notice was served upon the appellant/bank but today, again none has lunch sessions, so the matter was passed it was taken up after lunch, again none has present on behalf of the
In view of the above and given the prevailing circumstances, there seems ation to keep the appeal on the docket, indefinitely. Accordingly, the instant appeal stands dismissed for want of prosecution with liberty to the appellants to revive the same, if have any grievance from this order, within a period of three months Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, are also disposed of SAURAV PATHANIA 2025.08.27 17:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document