Darshana Devi v. Raj Rani

RSA-1904-1991

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH RSA-1904-1991 Date of decision : 22.01.2018 Darshana and another ... Appellant(s)

Versus

Raj Rani and another ... Respondent(s)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

Present:

None.

**** AMIT RAWAL, J. (ORAL) As per office report, notice could not be issued to respondent No.1 for want of complete address, whereas notice issued to respondent No.2 has been received back with the report that the same was received on the date fixed. Notice issued to appellant Nos.1 and 2 has been received back unserved with the report that the addressee left the address since 8-9 years.

It appears that the parties must have resiled with the factual aspect.

Dismissed for non-prosecution.

However, liberty is granted to the appellant to revive the case in case something survives.

( AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE 22.01.2018 Yogesh Sharma Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/ No Whether Reportable Yes/ No Yogesh Sharma 2018.01.24 15:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document