ESA-65-2025 (O&M) 126 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Kali Mata Mandir Society Vs Megh Raj and another CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH Present: None for the appellant. Mr. for respondent HARKESH MANUJA, J. Mr. Rajesh Bhateja, Advocate who was earlier engaged by the appellant submits that the appellant has already taken the brief assurance that some other counsel will appear on its behalf. 2. A perusal of the paper appearance on behalf of the appellant for the last i.e. 16.10.2025, 10.12.2025, 16.03.2026, 07.05.202 Today also, the position is the same interested to pursue 3. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. 4. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand 28.07.2026 sanjay Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ESA-65- Date of Decision: Kali Mata Mandir Society Vs Megh Raj and another HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH None for the appellant. Mr. Lovish Arora, Advocate for respondent No.1-Caveator. **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. Mr. Rajesh Bhateja, Advocate who was earlier engaged by the appellant submits that the appellant has already taken the brief assurance that some other counsel will appear on its behalf. A perusal of the paper-book shows that no one on behalf of the appellant for the last i.e. 16.10.2025, 10.12.2025, 16.03.2026, 07.05.202 the position is the same. It appears that the appellant is not interested to pursue with the case. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 28.07.2026 ......Appellant …..Respondents HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Mr. Rajesh Bhateja, Advocate who was earlier engaged by the appellant submits that the appellant has already taken the brief with the assurance that some other counsel will appear on its behalf. book shows that no one has put in on behalf of the appellant for the last five consecutive dates i.e. 16.10.2025, 10.12.2025, 16.03.2026, 07.05.2026 and 27.07.2026 . It appears that the appellant is not Consequently, the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No 1 Mr. Rajesh Bhateja, Advocate who was earlier engaged by the with the has put in dates and 27.07.2026. . It appears that the appellant is not Consequently, the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. SANJAY GUPTA 2026.07.29 12:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document