IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA-2692-2022(O&M) Date of decision: 26.08.2025 Parminder Singh … Appellant Versus Des Raj and others … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL Present: Mr. Rahul Garg, Advocate, for Mr. Naveen Batra, Advocate, for the appellant. *** VIKRAM AGGARWAL, J. (ORAL) On 11.03.2025, learned counsel representing the appellant sought an adjournment stating that he intended to move an application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC. On his request, the case was adjourned to 21.05.2025. On the next date, i.e. 21.05.2025, a written request for adjournment was circulated on the ground that learned counsel for the appellant was out of station. 2. A perusal of the order sheets reveals that the appeal came up for hearing for the first time on 12.12.2022, when on a request made by learned counsel for the appellant, the matter was adjourned. Thereafter, continuous requests for adjournment have been made. 3. Today again, a very casual request for adjournment has been made for filing an application for additional evidence, which this Court is not inclined to accept. 4. That being so, the Court is choiceless but to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution. 5. Ordered accordingly. ( Vikram Aggarwal ) Judge August 26, 2025 Rajan Whether speaking / reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No RAJAN KUMAR 2025.08.29 17:37 I am approving this document