RSA-2439- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 214 Joginder Singh and another Jagbir Singh CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present: - NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) against the whereby the plaintiff decreed. hearing i.e. 10.01.2023, not as, the learned counsel earlier representing them has expired, so as to enable the appellants has been received back No. 2 has been received back served through his brother. However, none has put in appearance on their behalf. appellants pendency of the present second appeal before this Court for a period of -2012 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA Date of Decision: Joginder Singh and another Versus Jagbir Singh and others CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA None for the appellant. Mr. Devesh Nehra, Advocate for the respondents NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The appellant-defendants No. 1 and 2 against the concurrent findings recorded by both the Courts below the plaintiffs’ suit for declaration and permanent injunction Perusal of the order-sheet reveals that o hearing i.e. 10.01.2023, notices were ordered to be issued to the appellants the learned counsel earlier representing them has expired, so as to the appellants to engage another counsel. Office report indicates that notice issued to appellant No. 1 has been received back duly served; whereas notice issued to appellant No. 2 has been received back served through his brother. However, none has put in appearance on their behalf. In 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 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA-2439-2012 (O&M) Date of Decision: 08.04.2025 .… Appellants .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA . Devesh Nehra, Advocate for the respondents. defendants No. 1 and 2 are in second appeal concurrent findings recorded by both the Courts below suit for declaration and permanent injunction was sheet reveals that on the last date of ices were ordered to be issued to the appellants the learned counsel earlier representing them has expired, so as to to engage another counsel. Office report indicates that notice issued to appellant No. 1 duly served; whereas notice issued to appellant No. 2 has been received back served through his brother. However, none In the aforesaid premise, issuance of fresh notice 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 in second appeal concurrent findings recorded by both the Courts below was n the last date of ices were ordered to be issued to the appellants the learned counsel earlier representing them has expired, so as to Office report indicates that notice issued to appellant No. 1 duly served; whereas notice issued to appellant No. 2 has been received back served through his brother. However, none 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 RISHU KATARIA 2025.04.08 18:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. RSA-2439- more than 12 attempt has been made by engage a new counsel. family members. instant regular second appeal is to move an appropriate application within a period of 0 today for reviving the same, if so, advised. 08.04.2025 rishu -2012 (O&M) -2- 12 years, the appellants lost interest in pursuing the same, as no attempt has been made by them to contact engage a new counsel. Moreover, the dispute is family members. Be that as it may, in view of the foregoing circumstances, the instant regular second appeal is disposed of, move an appropriate application within a period of 0 today for reviving the same, if so, advised. Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. .2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable lost interest in pursuing the same, as no to contact their previous counsel or to Moreover, the dispute is inter se between the Be that as it may, in view of the foregoing circumstances, the disposed of, with liberty to the appellants, move an appropriate application within a period of 06 months from Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No lost interest in pursuing the same, as no previous counsel or to the Be that as it may, in view of the foregoing circumstances, the , months from RISHU KATARIA 2025.04.08 18:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.