LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR Versus BHAG SINGH RFA - 123 of 2008 22.09.2025 Present: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for the appellants. CMP(M) Nos.980 to 1004 of 2024 & CMP Nos.11380 and 11382 of 2024 By way of instant applications filed under Order 41 Rule 19 CPC, prayer has been made on behalf of appellants/applicants to recall the order dated 31.03.2023 passed by this Court, inasmuch as RFA was dismissed for non-prosecution. 2. It is averred in the applications that this Court had granted three weeks’ time for filing the application for bringing on record the LR’s of deceased respondent Nos.1 to 5, 7, 19, 30, 35, 36, 39, 40 & 41 who had expired and also to take fresh steps for the service of respondent Nos.8 to 11, 14, 18, 20 & 32 by filing PF and correct addresses. 3. Though intimation in this regard was received in the office of applicants on 30.04.2022 vide learned Additional Advocate General letter dated 10.03.2022, but despite best efforts put in, correct addresses of afore respondents could not be procured well in time. Though during pendency of the present applications, appellants/applicants took steps for bringing on record the LRs of deceased respondents as well as for service of unserved respondents, but fact remains that though steps in such of the applications were taken, but since report of process server agency was that some of LRs have also expired and some are unserved, this Court repeatedly granted time to applicants/appellants to bring on record LRs of deceased LRs, however, despite repeated opportunities, applicants/appellants have neither taken steps nor have been able to serve the unserved respondents. 4. 4. Since despite there being repeated opportunities, applicants/appellants have not been able to do the needful and vide order dated 14.08.2025, this Court had granted last opportunity of four weeks to do the needful in terms of order dated 21.07.2025, whereby time was granted to take consequential steps for bringing on record the legal heirs of LRs No.1(a) to 1(d), 4(c), 5(b), 6, 7(e), 26, 33, 35(a) and 38, as well as for furnishing correct addresses for the service of proposed LRs Nos.No. 4(b), 4(d) to 4 (f), 5(c) to 5(f), 7(b) to 7(d), 36(b) and 36(c), 41(d) to 41(g), 13(a) to 13(c), respondents No. 19 to 25, 28 and 29, but yet needful has not been done and as such, this Court has no option but to reject the present applications. 5. Consequently, in view of the above, present applications are dismissed for non-prosecution. September 22, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (Rajeev Raturi) Judge