RSA-6002- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 242 Raj Kumar and others Sarup Singh CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present: - NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) 1. the judgment and decree dated Additional dated 21.05.2024 passed by the learned trial Court decreeing the suit of the plaintiffs was reversed. 2. to the year perusal of the order case was issued vide order dated listed for hearing 02 times i.e. on 04.02.2019 and 05.03 appellants have gone for the 3rd having been called twice. 3. notices issued to respondents No. 3 and 9 have been received back with the report ‘died’; whereas notices issued to respondent No. 7, 8(i), 10 to -2017 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA Date of Decision: Raj Kumar and others Versus Sarup Singh and others CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA None. NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) Plaintiffs No. 1 to 3, 9 and 10 are the judgment and decree dated 15.10.2016 District Judge, Kaithal, whereby the judgment and decree dated 21.05.2024 passed by the learned trial Court decreeing the suit of the plaintiffs was reversed. Perusal of the order-sheet(s) reveals that to the year 2017 and has come up for hearing after the year 2020. Further perusal of the order-sheets reveals that notice of motion issued vide order dated 31.10.2018 listed for hearing 02 times i.e. on 04.02.2019 and 05.03 ants have gone un-represented on both the said dates. Today again, time the appellants have gone un having been called twice. Moreover, office report dated 21.02.2023, indicates that issued to respondents No. 3 and 9 have been received back with the report ‘died’; whereas notices issued to respondent No. 7, 8(i), 10 to IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA-6002-2017 (O&M) Date of Decision: 17.07.2025 .… Appellants .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Plaintiffs No. 1 to 3, 9 and 10 are in second appeal against 15.10.2016, passed by the learned whereby the judgment and decree dated 21.05.2024 passed by the learned trial Court decreeing the suit of reveals that the matter pertains has come up for hearing after the year 2020. Further notice of motion in the present 31.10.2018. Thereafter, the matter was listed for hearing 02 times i.e. on 04.02.2019 and 05.03.2020 and the represented on both the said dates. Today again, time the appellants have gone un-represented, despite the case Moreover, office report dated 21.02.2023, indicates that issued to respondents No. 3 and 9 have been received back with the report ‘died’; whereas notices issued to respondent No. 7, 8(i), 10 to in second appeal against , passed by the learned whereby the judgment and decree dated 21.05.2024 passed by the learned trial Court decreeing the suit of he matter pertains has come up for hearing after the year 2020. Further in the present Thereafter, the matter was .2020 and the represented on both the said dates. Today again, , despite the case Moreover, office report dated 21.02.2023, indicates that issued to respondents No. 3 and 9 have been received back with the report ‘died’; whereas notices issued to respondent No. 7, 8(i), 10 to RISHU KATARIA 2025.07.21 11:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. RSA-6002- 12 have been received back unserved with the report given address’ appellants had not filed any application for impleading the LRs of deceased-respondents No. 3 and 9; and had also not taken any steps for effecting service upon unserved respondents, as per office report. 4. 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 l non-prosecution. 5. 6. 17.07.2025 rishu -2017 (O&M) -2- 12 have been received back unserved with the report given address’. It is reported that till da appellants had not filed any application for impleading the LRs of respondents No. 3 and 9; and had also not taken any steps for effecting service upon unserved respondents, as per office report. 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. 17.07.2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable 12 have been received back unserved with the report ‘not residing at the . It is reported that till date learned counsel for the appellants had not filed any application for impleading the LRs of respondents No. 3 and 9; and had also not taken any steps for effecting service upon unserved respondents, as per office report. e 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 n the other hand, the appellants have adopted an utterly casual and careless approach. It is clear that neither the appellants seriously interested in pursuing the present matter. eft 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 ‘not residing at the te learned counsel for the appellants had not filed any application for impleading the LRs of respondents No. 3 and 9; and had also not taken any steps for 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 2025.07.21 11:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.