Punjab-Haryana High Court
Dharam Singh vs Harbans Singh And Others on 10 November, 2010
Author: Rakesh Kumar Garg
Bench: Rakesh Kumar Garg
C.M. No.12447-C of 2010 in
R.S.A. No.935 of 2008 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
****
C.M. No.12447-C of 2010 in
R.S.A. No.935 of 2008
Date of Decision:10.11.2010
Dharam Singh
.....Appellant
Vs.
Harbans Singh and others
.....Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG
Present:- Mr. Vikram Chaudhary, Advocate for
Mr. Jainainder Saini, Advocate for the
applicant- appellant.
****
RAKESH KUMAR GARG, J.
In this regular second appeal filed by the plaintiff, challenge is to the judgment and decree dated 24.10.2007 passed by the lower appellate court affirming that of the trial court dated 9.5.2001 whereby suit of the plaintiff for declaration or in the alternative suit for possession was dismissed.
None appeared in this appeal on 5.11.2008 and 17.11.2008. Even on 8.1.2009, no one was present on behalf of the appellant to assist the Court. Noticing the aforesaid facts, this Court vide order dated 8.1.2009 had dismissed this appeal for non-prosecution.
C.M. No.10180-C of 2009 was filed by the appellant for condoning the delay of 216 days in filing the C.M. No.10181-C of 2009 for C.M. No.12447-C of 2010 in R.S.A. No.935 of 2008 -2- restoration of the appeal. The aforesaid applications were allowed by this Court vide order dated 7.10.2009 and the main appeal was ordered to be listed for motion hearing on 5.11.2009. On 5.11.2009, this Court passed the following order:-
"Mr. Jainainder Saini, Advocate, Counsel for the appellant is not ready with the arguments and seeks an adjournment.
Adjourned to 17.2.2010."
On 17.2.2010, Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate was present for the appellant and notice of motion was issued for 7.7.2010. On July 7, 2010, one Mr. Navdeep Singh, Advocate was present for the appellant and the following order was passed:-
"As per office report, respondents No.1, 4 and 8 have been served. However, no one appears on their behalf. They are proceeded against ex parte. Mr. Hitesh Ghai, Advocate appears on behalf of respondents No.10 to 19, 21 and 22 and further informs this Court that respondents No.2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9 and 20 have already died before filing this appeal.
List on 21.09.2010 for further consideration. In the meantime, counsel for the appellant may take necessary steps to bring on record the LRs to the aforesaid respondents who are reported to be dead."
On 21.9.2010, no one appeared on behalf of the appellant to assist this Court and while dismissing the appeal in default, the following order was passed:-
"On July 07, 2010, it was noticed by this Court that C.M. No.12447-C of 2010 in R.S.A. No.935 of 2008 -3- respondents No.2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9 and 20 had already died before filing of this appeal. Counsel for the appellant has not taken any steps to bring on record the LRs of aforesaid respondents, who are reported to be dead, neither the appellant is represented.
Dismissed in default."
Today, Civil Misc. No.12447-C of 2010 filed under Order 41 Rule 19 read with Section 151 CPC for restoration of the appeal, which was dismissed in default vide order dated 21.9.2010 has come up for hearing in the urgent cause list. Mr. Vikram Chaudhary, Advocate has sought adjournment on behalf of counsel for the appellant. However, keeping in view the aforesaid facts on the record, I find no justification for adjourning this application further. In this view of the matter, I find no merit in this application.
Dismissed.
November 10, 2010 ( RAKESH KUMAR GARG ) renu JUDGE