Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 43676 (PNJ)

HARBANS KAUR AND ORS. v. JIWAN LAL AND ORS.

RSA/4725/2001 · 2025-07-14

Nidhi Gupta

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

RSA-4725- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 210 Harbans Kaur and others Jiwan Lal and others CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present: - NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) 1. along with their co appeal against the concurrent findings rendered by both the Courts below whereby their suit 2. hearing i.e. 07.04.2025 -2001 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA Date of Decision: Harbans Kaur and others Versus and others CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA None for the appellants. Mr. Vivek Lamba, Advocate for respondents No. 2 to 5. Mr. BS Khehar, Advocate for respondents No. 6 to 8. NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The LRs of defendant No. 1- along with their co-defendants No. 2 to 4/appellants herein appeal against the concurrent findings rendered by both the Courts below whereby their suit of plaintiff/respondents No. 1 to The matter pertains to the year 2001 and i.e. 07.04.2025, following order was passed by this Court: “The matter pertains to the year 2001 and listed for hearing before the Daily Pre 2013. As per office report, learned counsel for the parties have been duly informed about the date fixed. However, none has put in appearance on behalf of either of the parties. In view of the above and in the interest of justice, let actual date of hearing notices be issued to the appellants and IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA-4725-2001 (O&M) Date of Decision: 14.07.2025 .… Appellants .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. Vivek Lamba, Advocate for respondents No. 2 to 5. Mr. BS Khehar, Advocate for respondents No. 6 to 8. -Harnek Singh (since deceased) defendants No. 2 to 4/appellants herein are in second appeal against the concurrent findings rendered by both the Courts below of plaintiff/respondents No. 1 to 5, was partly decreed. The matter pertains to the year 2001 and on the last date of , following order was passed by this Court:- The matter pertains to the year 2001 and was last listed for hearing before the Daily Pre-Lok Adalat in the year As per office report, learned counsel for the parties have been duly informed about the date fixed. However, none has put in appearance on behalf of either of the parties. In view of the above and in the interest of justice, let actual date of hearing notices be issued to the appellants and Harnek Singh (since deceased) are in second appeal against the concurrent findings rendered by both the Courts below on the last date of was last at in the year As per office report, learned counsel for the parties have been duly informed about the date fixed. However, none In view of the above and in the interest of justice, let actual date of hearing notices be issued to the appellants and RISHU KATARIA 2025.07.15 19:49 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. RSA-4725- 3. office report dated 09.07.2025, Parties Appellant no.1 and 9 Respondent no. 6, 7 Appellants no. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Appellant no. 2 Respondents no.1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Appellant no. 8 Appellant no. 10 There is no representation on behalf of the appellants, despite serv 4. informs that respondent No. 1 has expired and on instructions, he submits that the dispute in the present second appeal was with regard to sharing of the tube well. It is submitted that after the institu has changed several hands, therefore, the matter or not. 5. the 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. 6. disposed of -2001 (O&M) -2- the respondents for 14.07.2025. Registry shall also make an effort to effect service upon both the parties through the SHO of the concerned area, so that effective steps can be taken to dispose of the matter.” Pursuant thereto, notices were issued to both the parties and office report dated 09.07.2025, reads as follows: Remarks Appellant no.1 and 9 Served Respondent no. 6, 7 8 Served through Clerk Appellants no. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Married and residing with their in Appellant no. 2 Served through mother Respondents no.1, 2, 3, 4, Not residing at the given address Appellant no. 8 Served through brother Appellant no. 10 Served through son There is no representation on behalf of the appellants, despite serv Learned counsel appearing for respondents No. 2 to 5 informs that respondent No. 1 has expired and on instructions, he submits that the dispute in the present second appeal was with regard to sharing of the tube well. It is submitted that after the institu has changed several hands, therefore, it is not clear if anything survives in the matter or not. In view of the aforesaid premise, the appellants would be a futile exercise. It appears that due to 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 them to contact a new counsel. Be that as it may, the instant regular second appeal is disposed of, with liberty to the appellant the respondents for 14.07.2025. Registry shall also make an effort to effect service upon both the parties through the SHO ned area, so that effective steps can be taken to Pursuant thereto, notices were issued to both the parties and reads as follows:- Served through Clerk Married and residing with their in-laws Served through mother Not residing at the given address Served through brother erved through son There is no representation on behalf of the appellants, despite service. Learned counsel appearing for respondents No. 2 to 5 informs that respondent No. 1 has expired and on instructions, he submits that the dispute in the present second appeal was with regard to sharing of the tube well. It is submitted that after the institution of the suit, the land it is not clear if anything survives in In view of the aforesaid premise, issuance of fresh notice to 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, the instant regular second appeal is appellants to move an appropriate the respondents for 14.07.2025. Registry shall also make an effort to effect service upon both the parties through the SHO ned area, so that effective steps can be taken to Pursuant thereto, notices were issued to both the parties and Learned counsel appearing for respondents No. 2 to 5 informs that respondent No. 1 has expired and on instructions, he submits that the dispute in the present second appeal was with regard to sharing of tion of the suit, the land it is not clear if anything survives in issuance of fresh notice 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, the instant regular second appeal is to move an appropriate RISHU KATARIA 2025.07.15 19:49 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. RSA-4725- application within a period of 0 same, if so, advised. 7. 14.07.2025 rishu -2001 (O&M) -3- application within a period of 03 months from today for reviving the same, if so, advised. Pending application(s), if any, shall .2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable months from today for reviving the Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No months from today for reviving the RISHU KATARIA 2025.07.15 19:49 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.