RSA-690-2017 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 217 Shri Vijay Goel Mrs. Meenakshi Singla CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present: - NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) 1. findings rendered by both the Courts below whereby the suit for recovery filed by the plaintiff was dismissed by both the Courts below. 2. motion in the same was issued order dated times i.e. 01.03.2019, 06.08.2019, 07.11.2019, 27.11.2019 and 11.12.2019, out of which on 07.11.2019, account of non when this case was listed for hearing co-ordinate Bench of this Court: 2017 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA Date of Decision: Shri Vijay Goel Versus Mrs. Meenakshi Singla and another CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA None. NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) Appellant-plaintiff is in second appeal against the findings rendered by both the Courts below whereby the suit for recovery filed by the plaintiff was dismissed by both the Courts below. The present appeal pertains to the year 20 motion in the same was issued by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court order dated 07.03.2018. Thereafter, the appeal was listed for hearing 05 times i.e. 01.03.2019, 06.08.2019, 07.11.2019, 27.11.2019 and 11.12.2019, out of which on 04 consecutive dates 07.11.2019, 27.11.2019 and 11.12.2019), the same was adjourned on account of non-appearance on behalf of the appellant. when this case was listed for hearing, following order was passed by a ordinate Bench of this Court:- “With the respondents having been proceeded against ex parte, vide an order passed on motion having been issued in the thereafter none has appeared even for the appellant for dates running, with a request for an adjournment being made today. Adjourned for the last time to 14.05.2020, with it clear that if the appeal is not argued on that date also, it IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA-690-2017 (O&M) Date of Decision: 09.09.2025 .… Appellant .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA second appeal against the concurrent findings rendered by both the Courts below whereby the suit for recovery filed by the plaintiff was dismissed by both the Courts below. pertains to the year 2017 and notice of ordinate Bench of this Court vide Thereafter, the appeal was listed for hearing 05 times i.e. 01.03.2019, 06.08.2019, 07.11.2019, 27.11.2019 and consecutive dates (06.08.2019, , the same was adjourned on ppearance on behalf of the appellant. On 21.01.2020, , following order was passed by a With the respondents having been proceeded against an order passed on 01.03.2019 (notice of motion having been issued in the appeal on 07.03.2018), thereafter none has appeared even for the appellant for four dates running, with a request for an adjournment being made Adjourned for the last time to 14.05.2020, with it made if the appeal is not argued on that date also, it concurrent findings rendered by both the Courts below whereby the suit for recovery of vide Thereafter, the appeal was listed for hearing 05 times i.e. 01.03.2019, 06.08.2019, 07.11.2019, 27.11.2019 and (06.08.2019, , the same was adjourned on On 21.01.2020, , following order was passed by a With the respondents having been proceeded against 01.03.2019 (notice of appeal on 07.03.2018), four dates running, with a request for an adjournment being made made if the appeal is not argued on that date also, it RISHU KATARIA 2025.09.11 08:49 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. RSA-690-2017 (O&M) 3. for the appellant had sought none has put in appearance on behalf of the appellant, despite the case having been called twice. 4. has 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 appellant in the interest of justice. On the other hand, the appellant ha casual and careless approach. It is clear that neither the appellant counsel is Court is left with no other option except to prosecution. 5. 6. 09.09.2025 rishu 2017 (O&M) -2- would stand dismissed-in-default, with no further order required to be passed in that regard. On the next date of hearing i.e. 23.08.2022, learned counsel for the appellant had sought time to address arguments. Today again, none has put in appearance on behalf of the appellant, despite the case having been called twice. A bare reading of the above 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 appellant in the interest of justice. On the other hand, the appellant ha l 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 default, with no further order required to be passed in that regard.” On the next date of hearing i.e. 23.08.2022, learned counsel time to address arguments. Today again, none has put in appearance on behalf of the appellant, despite the case facts shows that the appellant exhibited an utterly casual attitude in his 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 appellant in the interest of justice. On the other hand, the appellant has adopted an utterly l and careless approach. 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- Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No default, with no further order On the next date of hearing i.e. 23.08.2022, learned counsel time to address arguments. Today again, none has put in appearance on behalf of the appellant, despite the case 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 appellant in the adopted an utterly seriously interested in pursuing the present matter. Thus, this RISHU KATARIA 2025.09.11 08:49 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.