06.08.2025 Date o Chand Wazir Chand v. Kishore Cha re Chand and another
Case Details
IOIN-RSA RSA-5479- SA-5479-2003 in/and -2003 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIG E HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HA ND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 215 IOIN IOIN-RSA-5479-2003 in/and RSA-5479-2003 (O&M) RSA Date of Decision: 06.08.2025 Date o Chand Wazir Chand .… Appellant Versus Kishore Cha re Chand and another .... Respondents CORAM: H M: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDH NIDHI GUPTA Present: - None. NIDHI GUP I GUPTA, J. (ORAL) 1. The present appeal has been lis een listed under the IOIN Category for completi mpletion of service. However, perusa that perusal of order-sheets reveals that the present resent appeal is pending for co pon or completion of service upon respondent(s dent(s) since the year 2012. As such n up s such, the main appeal is taken up for hearing t aring today itself. 2.
Legal Reasoning
The appellant-plaintiff is in the in second appeal against the judgment an ent and decree dated 09.08.2003, pass onal , passed by the learned Additional District Judg t Judge, Ludhiana, vide which the a No. the appeal filed by defendant No. 2/respondent ondent No. 2 herein was partly allo and ly allowed; and the judgment and decree of th of the learned trial Court dated 22. the 22.10.2001 was modified to the extent that that the relief of specific perform ated performance of Agreement dated 14.12.1994 1994 given in favour of the plaintiff was laintiff was withdrawn and he was held entitle ntitled to get refund of the earnest rom arnest money of ₹1,00,000/- from defendant N ant No. 1 along with interest @ 12% e of 12% per annum from the date of taking over over the amount till the date of instit , the f institution of the suit. Further, the RISHU KATARIA 2025.08.08 18:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. IOIN-RSA RSA-5479- SA-5479-2003 in/and -2003 (O&M) -2- plaintiff was ff was also held entitled to future int rom ure interest @ 6% per annum from the date of i te of institution of the suit till the date retal he date of final payment of decretal amount from t from defendant No. 1. 3. The matter pertains to the year way e year 2003 and was admitted way back vide or ide order dated 19.02.2004. As per o , per office report dated 05.12.2012, vide letter etter No. 1984 dated 19.10.2012, lear llant , learned counsel for the appellant was requeste quested to deposit process-fee along w rved long with fresh address of unserved respondent N dent No. 2 within a fortnight. Howev one However, the needful was not done by learned c rned counsel for the appellant and ac ond and accordingly, the present second appeal was l l was listed for hearing under the IOI time IOIN Category for the first time on 21.12.20 .12.2012, for completion of servic . 2. service upon respondent No. 2. Thereafter, t after, the matter was listed for hearing gory earing under the aforesaid category 03 times i.e. es i.e. on 14.05.2013, 16.08.2013 and dful 13 and 10.01.2014, but the needful had not been
Legal Reasoning
t been done by learned counsel for th nsel l for the appellant. Learned counsel for the appe e appellant moved an application (CM ging on (CM-4650-C-2014) for bringing on record the ord the LRs of respondent No. 1-Kisho wed Kishore Chand which was allowed by a co-ord ordinate Bench of this Court vide and rt vide order dated 18.02.2015 and notices to th s to the newly added respondents were d on were also ordered to be issued on furnishing of hing of process fee and addresses of th s of the said LRs. 4. On 24.04.2015, when this c ring, this case was listed for hearing, following or ing order was passed by a co-ordinate dinate Bench of this Court:- “CM No. 4280-C-2015 CM is allowed and LRs o ht Rs of appellant No. 1 are brought on record subject to just excepti ceptions. RSA No. 5479-2003 Mr. Bikramjit Singh Ran or Randhawa, Advocate appears for respondent No. 1. Vakalatnama ama is taken on record. RISHU KATARIA 2025.08.08 18:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. IOIN-RSA RSA-5479- SA-5479-2003 in/and -2003 (O&M) -3- Service is complete. List List as per its turn” 5. Now, as per office report dated nsel t dated 02.07.2025, learned counsel for the appe e appellant vide e-mail(s) dated 30.0 was 30.05.2025 and 17.06.2025 was requested to ted to take steps to complete the serv (b), e service qua respondent No. 1(b), however, the the needful has not been done, ac peal ne, accordingly, the present appeal has been aga en again listed under the IOIN Catego ategory. 6. On the last date of hearing i.e. g i.e. 23.07.2025, following order was passed b assed by this Court:- “Learned counsel for bo ly r both the parties have been duly informed through their respect dy pective e-mails. However, nobody has put in appearance on behal ehalf of the parties. In the interest of justic 5, ustice, adjourned to 06.08.2025, making in clear that it shall to shall be the last opportunity to address argument.” 7. Pursuant thereto, office report een report dated 21.07.2025 has been received whi ed which reads as follows:- Respondent ondent No. 1(a) Represented through ingh hrough counsel Mr. Bikramjit Singh Randhawa. Respondent Respondent ondent No. 1(b) Died. ondent No. 2 Represented through order dated 18.02.20 vide hrough Counsel Mr. PS Rana, vide .02.2015. 8. It has also been reported that le rties that learned counsel for the parties have been d een duly informed through e-mails ab ver, ails about the date fixed. However, today none h none has put in appearance on behalf o pite ehalf of either of the parties, despite the case havi se having been called twice. 9. From the above facts it is clear clear that right since the inception/ of filing of the instant appeal, he appellant has exhibited an the ap an utterly casua casual attitude in his pursuit of the present litigation. It is clear RISHU KATARIA 2025.08.08 18:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. IOIN-RSA RSA-5479- SA-5479-2003 in/and -2003 (O&M) -4- that neither either the appellant nor his counse in counsel is seriously interested in pursuing the ng the present matter. In the aforesa resh foresaid premise, issuance of fresh notice to app appellant or his LRs would be a f that be a futile exercise. It appears that due to sheer sheer long pendency of the present se ourt sent second appeal before this Court for a period period of more than 22 years, the ap lost appellant or his LRs have lost interest in pu t in pursuing the same. Thus, this Co tion his Court is left with no other option except to dis dismiss present second appeal, for al, for non-prosecution. 10. 11. Ordered accordingly. IOIN as well as pending appl application(s), if any, shall also stand dispose
Decision
disposed of. 2025 06.08.2025 rishu ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No RISHU KATARIA 2025.08.08 18:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.