RSA-1165- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 226 Jhabar Singh Anil Kumar and others CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present: - NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) 1. concurrent findings rendered by both the Courts below whereby the suit for possession filed by respondent No. 1 the plaintiff was held entitled to recovery of amount of sale consideration of ₹4,47,500/ @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of suit till the date of realization. 2. dated 02.03.2017, of delay of 611 days in filing the appeal was issued by the Bench of this Court 02 dates of hearing i.e. on 03.05.201 gone un-represented. 3. un-represented despite the case having been called twice. 4. has exhibited an utterly casual attitude in -2017 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA Date of Decision: Jhabar Singh Versus Anil Kumar and others CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA None. NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) Appellant-defendant No. 1 is concurrent findings rendered by both the Courts below whereby the suit for possession filed by respondent No. 1-plaintiff was partly decreed the plaintiff was held entitled to recovery of amount of sale consideration 4,47,500/- from defendant No. 1/appellant herein @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of suit till the date of realization. The present appeal pertains to the year dated 02.03.2017, notice is application (CM of 611 days in filing the appeal was issued by the Bench of this Court. Perusal of the order-sheet(s) reveals that on the last 02 dates of hearing i.e. on 03.05.2017 and represented. Today again for the 3rd time represented despite the case having been called twice. A bare reading of the above exhibited an utterly casual attitude in IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA-1165-2017 (O&M) Date of Decision: 16.09.2025 .… Appellant .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA defendant No. 1 is in second appeal against the concurrent findings rendered by both the Courts below whereby the suit plaintiff was partly decreed and the plaintiff was held entitled to recovery of amount of sale consideration /appellant herein along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of suit till the date of realization. pertains to the year 2017. Vide order is application (CM-2712-2017) for condonation of 611 days in filing the appeal was issued by the predecessor sheet(s) reveals that on the last 7 and 23.10.2017, the appellant had time, the appellant has gone represented despite the case having been called twice. facts shows that the appellant exhibited an utterly casual attitude in his pursuit of the present second appeal against the concurrent findings rendered by both the Courts below whereby the suit and the plaintiff was held entitled to recovery of amount of sale consideration along with interest . Vide order 2017) for condonation predecessor sheet(s) reveals that on the last 23.10.2017, the appellant had the appellant has gone pursuit of the present RISHU KATARIA 2025.09.18 09:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. RSA-1165- litigation. It is to be appreciated that very valuable public time of the Court has been expended in affording opportunities to the appellant in the interest of justice. On the other hand, the appellant ha casual and careless approach. It is cl counsel is Court is left with no other option except to prosecution. 5. 6. 16.09.2025 rishu -2017 (O&M) -2- . It is to be appreciated that very valuable public time of the Court has been expended in affording opportunities to the appellant in the interest of justice. On the other hand, the appellant ha casual and careless approach. It is clear that neither the appellant 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 also stand disposed of .09.2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable . It is to be appreciated that very valuable public time of the Court has been expended in affording opportunities to the appellant in the interest of justice. On the other hand, the appellant has adopted an utterly ear 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- any, shall also stand disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No . It is to be appreciated that very valuable public time of the Court has been expended in affording opportunities to the appellant in the adopted an utterly seriously interested in pursuing the present matter. Thus, this RISHU KATARIA 2025.09.18 09:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.