Jagroop Singh v. Dalip Singh

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND H ARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH (206) RSA-682-1999 (O&M) Date of Decision:-01.05.2026 JAGROOP SINGH ... Appellant

Versus

DALIP SINGH (SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH LRS AND OTHERS

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL

Present:

Mr. Sandeep Khunger, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Arjun Dhaliwal, Advocate for Ms. Deepali Puri, Advocate for respondents No.11 to 16.

**** VIRINDER AGGARWAL, J. (Oral) 1.

Previous order has not been complied with. Cost imposed vide order dated 17.03.2026 has also not been deposited. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in spite of best efforts, he is unable to establish contact with the appellant. It seems that appellant has lost interest in pursuing the appeal.

2.

In such circumstances, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the case on the docket, indefinitely. 3.

Accordingly, the instant appeal stands dismissed for want of prosecution.

4.

As a natural corollary, since the main case stand dismissed for want of prosecution of, all pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of, as no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping them pending.

(VIRINDER AGGARWAL) 01st May, 2026 JUDGE Poonam Whether reasoned / speaking?

Yes / No Whether reportable?

Yes / No POONAM 2026.05.01 03:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document