RSA-1804- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 221 Ishwar Sham Sunder CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present: - NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) concurrent judgments of both the Courts below whereby the plaintiff’s suit for declaration with consequential relief for permanent dismissed. hearing after the year appeal was order dated the request made by learned counsel for the appellant. application moved by the appellant, the same was restored vide order dated 18.01.2021. counsel for the appellant had sought time to inspect the trial Court record. Today, yet another r counsel for the appellant on the has exhibited an utterly casual attitude in -2016 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA Date of Decision: Versus Sham Sunder and others CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. JB Sharma, Advocate for the appellant. NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The plaintiff-appellant is in second appeal against the concurrent judgments of both the Courts below whereby the plaintiff’s suit for declaration with consequential relief for permanent The matter pertains to the year hearing after the year 2021. Perusal of the order-sheet(s) shows that appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution order dated 08.01.2019 as, the matter was consistently the request made by learned counsel for the appellant. application moved by the appellant, the same was restored vide order dated 18.01.2021. On the last date of hearing i.e. 06.04.2021, learned counsel for the appellant had sought time to inspect the trial Court record. Today, yet another request for an adjournment has been made by learned counsel for the appellant on the same ground, which A bare reading of the above facts shows that the appellant exhibited an utterly casual attitude in IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA-1804-2016 (O&M) Date of Decision: 02.04.2025 .… Appellant .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. JB Sharma, Advocate for the appellant. appellant is in second appeal against the concurrent judgments of both the Courts below whereby the plaintiff’s suit for declaration with consequential relief for permanent injunction was The matter pertains to the year 2016 and has come up for sheet(s) shows that earlier this second prosecution by a co-ordinate Bench vide the matter was consistently being adjourned at the request made by learned counsel for the appellant. However, upon an application moved by the appellant, the same was restored vide order On the last date of hearing i.e. 06.04.2021, learned counsel for the appellant had sought time to inspect the trial Court record. an adjournment has been made by learned ground, which is unjustifiable. A bare reading of the above facts shows that the appellant exhibited an utterly casual attitude in his pursuit of the present appellant is in second appeal against the concurrent judgments of both the Courts below whereby the plaintiff’s was second ordinate Bench vide adjourned at upon an application moved by the appellant, the same was restored vide order On the last date of hearing i.e. 06.04.2021, learned counsel for the appellant had sought time to inspect the trial Court record. an adjournment has been made by learned pursuit of the present RISHU KATARIA 2025.04.03 12:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. RSA-1804- litigation. It is to be appreciated that very valuable public time of the Court has been expended in affording opportunities to interest of justice. O casual and careless approach. counsel is Court is left with no other option except to prosecution. 02.04.2025 rishu -2016 (O&M) -2- tigation. It is to be appreciated that very valuable public time of the Court has been expended in affording opportunities to interest of justice. On the other hand, the appellant casual and careless approach. It is clear that neither the appellant nor seriously interested in pursuing the present matter. Thus, this Court is left with no other option except to prosecution. Ordered accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. 02.04.2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable tigation. It is to be appreciated that very valuable public time of the Court has been expended in affording opportunities to the appellant in the n the other hand, the appellant has adopted an utterly It is clear that neither the appellant nor his seriously interested in pursuing the present matter. Thus, this Court is left with no other option except to dismiss the same for non- if any, shall stands disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No tigation. It is to be appreciated that very valuable public time of the appellant in the adopted an utterly his seriously interested in pursuing the present matter. Thus, this RISHU KATARIA 2025.04.03 12:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.