Joyti Bala v. Tarsem Singh And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM-A-1584-MA-2017 (O&M) Date of decision: 15.02.2019 Jyoti Bala ..... Applicant

Versus

Tarsem Singh and others ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN PRESENT: None.

RAMENDRA JAIN, J. (ORAL) A written request for adjournment has been circulated by learned counsel for the applicant, on the ground that maternal grandmother (Nani) of learned counsel has expired. However, the request made by learned counsel for the applicant is rejected, in view of the fact that the instant application was filed on 05.07.2017. Thereafter, it has been taken on Board for five times. Every time the case has to be adjourned on request of learned counsel for the applicant on the grounds that he is out of station, his uncle has expired or on account of his absence and on one date he made request for adjournment. Today also he moved written request for adjournment. Considering the above conduct of counsel for the applicant and the fact that instant application is un-necessarily pending since last around 1 year and 8 months, the same is dismissed for want of prosecution.

February 15, 2019 ( RAMENDRA JAIN ) rishu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No RISHU KATARIA 2019.02.20 14:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document