Manisha And ORS. v. Bal Kishan And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

FAO-5184-2017(O&M) Date of decision: 02.12.2025 Manisha & Others ...Appellant(s) Vs.

Bal Kishan & Others

...Respondent(s)

CORAM:

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

*** NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) Present appeal is of the year 2017 and notice has not yet been issued in the main appeal.

2.

Order sheets reveal that on 06.05.2019 and 25.11.2019, the matter was adjourned at request of learned counsel for the appellants. Thereafter, on the last date of hearing i.e. 11.03.2025, following order was passed by this Court:- "Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants seeks time to apprise this Court as to whether respondent No.1/driver of the alleged offending vehicle has been convicted or acquitted in the trial in FIR No.1065 dated 09.09.2015, registered under Sections 279 and 304-A IPC at Police Station Chandni Bagh, Panipat and also to inspect the record of the learned Tribunal so that he may be in a position to make submissions on the next date of hearing.

Adjourned to 02.12.2025 to enable learned counsel for the appellants to do the needful as aforesaid.

In the meanwhile, learned counsel for the appellant(s) shall furnish the respective short synopsis, list of dates and events in chronological order, written arguments and list of judgments, SUNENA 2025.12.04 10:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

if any, as well as the translated copies of the relevant lower Court record(s).

Since the appeal is of the year 2017, it is made clear that no further adjournment shall be granted."

3.

Even today, there is no representation on behalf of the appellants.

4.

A bare reading of the above facts shows that the appellants have exhibited an utterly casual attitude in their pursuit of the present litigation. It is to be appreciated that very valuable public time of the Court has been expended in affording opportunities to the appellants in the interest of justice. On the other hand, the appellants have adopted an utterly casual and careless approach. It is clear that neither the appellants nor their counsel are seriously interested in pursuing the present matter. Thus, this Court is left with no other option except to dismiss the same for non-prosecution.

5.

Ordered accordingly.

6.

Pending application(s) if any also stand(s) disposed of. 02.12.2025 (Nidhi Gupta) Sunena Judge Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No SUNENA 2025.12.04 10:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document