← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCR/965/1992dismissed

Sudhir Kumar Abrol v. Goverdhan Dass

2023-12-06Ms. Justice Nidhi Gupta2 pages

2023:PHHC:155997 Page 1 of 2 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CR-965-1992 (O&M) Date of order: 06.12.2023 Sudhir Kumar Abrol .....Petitioner(s) Vs.

Goverdhan Dass .....Respondent(s)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present:- None.

***** Nidhi Gupta, J.

This is a burnt case file. As there was no representation on behalf of either of the parties on 14.12.2022, Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had directed that from the salvaged papers on record, notices be issued to both the parties; as also to learned counsel representing both the parties. Pursuant thereto, last order dated 07.02.2023 indicates that though learned counsel for the parties had been informed, none had appeared on behalf of the parties on the said date of hearing i.e. 07.02.2023 and thus, notices were again directed to be issued to learned counsel for the parties. As per office report dated 23.01.2023, notices issued to the parties have been received back unserved with the report "left the given address". Notice issued to one Ram Ludhia, has been received back with the report "passed away". Notice issued to counsels concerned received back "served'. As per office report dated 21.03.2023, learned counsel for the parties have been informed through e-mail about the date fixed. However, today, there is no representation on behalf of either of the parties.

SUNENA 2023.12.11 11:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

2023:PHHC:155997 Page 2 of 2  In view of the above noted position, issuance of fresh notice to the petitioner would be an exercise in futility. It appears that during the pendency of the petition before this Court for a period of about 31 years, the petitioner has lost interest in pursuing the petition as no attempt has been made to contact the counsel. Hence, this Court is left with no other option but to dismiss the present petition for want of prosecution. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to revive the present petition in accordance with law, within a period of 6 months from today, if so advised.

Pending application(s) if any also stand(s) disposed of. 06.12.2023 (Nidhi Gupta) Sunena Judge Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No SUNENA 2023.12.11 11:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document