RSA-4621- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 222 Angrej and others Munir Khan CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present: - NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) concurrent judgments and decrees of both the Courts below respondent/plaintiff’s decreed. was issued way 14.03.2019, learned counsel for the the legal representatives of the sole respondent. Thereafter, on the next date of hearing i.e. 17.09.2019, the appellant had gone un last opportunity was afforded to the appellants to implead the LRs o deceased-respondent. On the last date of hearing i.e. 17.01.2025 counsel for the appellant had sought further time to do the needful as aforesaid. Office report dated 15.01.2025 indicates that the needful has -2014 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA Date of Decision: Angrej and others Versus Munir Khan CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA None. NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The defendant-appellants are concurrent judgments and decrees of both the Courts below respondent/plaintiff’s suit for declaration and permanent The matter pertains to the year was issued way back on 21.08.2018. Perusal of the order-sheets reveals 14.03.2019, learned counsel for the appellants had sought time to implead the legal representatives of the sole respondent. Thereafter, on the next date of hearing i.e. 17.09.2019, the appellant had gone un last opportunity was afforded to the appellants to implead the LRs o respondent. On the last date of hearing i.e. 17.01.2025 counsel for the appellant had sought further time to do the needful as Office report dated 15.01.2025 indicates that the needful has IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA-4621-2014 (O&M) Date of Decision: 25.03.2025 .… Appellants .... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA are in second appeal against the concurrent judgments and decrees of both the Courts below whereby the suit for declaration and permanent injunction was The matter pertains to the year 2014 and notice of motion sheets reveals that vide order dated appellants had sought time to implead the legal representatives of the sole respondent. Thereafter, on the next date of hearing i.e. 17.09.2019, the appellant had gone un-represented and last opportunity was afforded to the appellants to implead the LRs of respondent. On the last date of hearing i.e. 17.01.2025, learned counsel for the appellant had sought further time to do the needful as Office report dated 15.01.2025 indicates that the needful has in second appeal against the the injunction was of motion vide order dated appellants had sought time to implead the legal representatives of the sole respondent. Thereafter, on the next represented and f , learned counsel for the appellant had sought further time to do the needful as Office report dated 15.01.2025 indicates that the needful has RISHU KATARIA 2025.03.28 17:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. RSA-4621- not been done till date as deceased-respondent. despite the case having been called twice. have exhibited an utterly casual attitude in litigation. It is to be appreciated that very valuable public time of the Court has been expended in affording opportunities to the interest of justice. O utterly casual and careless approach. It is clear that nor their counsel Thus, this Court is left with no other option except to non-prosecution. 25.03.2025 rishu -2014 (O&M) -2- not been done till date as, no application for impleading the LRs of respondent. Even, there is no representation on behalf of the appellant despite the case having been called twice. A bare reading of the above facts shows that the appellant exhibited an utterly casual attitude in litigation. It is to be appreciated that very valuable public time of the Court has been expended in affording opportunities to the interest of justice. On the other hand, the appellant utterly casual and careless approach. It is clear that counsel are 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. .2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable cation for impleading the LRs of representation on behalf of the appellants, A bare reading of the above facts shows that the appellants exhibited an utterly casual attitude in their pursuit of the present litigation. It is to be appreciated that very valuable public time of the Court has been expended in affording opportunities to the appellants in and, the appellants have adopted an utterly casual and careless approach. It is clear that neither the appellants seriously interested in pursuing the present matter. Thus, this Court is left with no other option except to dismiss the same for Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No cation for impleading the LRs of pursuit of the present litigation. It is to be appreciated that very valuable public time of the in adopted an seriously interested in pursuing the present matter. the same for RISHU KATARIA 2025.03.28 17:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.