The single-judge court dismissed the appeal on the grounds of non-prosecution, citing non-compliance with a prior order regarding costs, addresses, and impleadment, along with the absence of counsel.
The appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Case No. : R. S. A. No.742 of 2007 (O&M) Date of Decision : March 07, 2011
Smt. Murti and others
.... Appellants
Vs.
Shanu Lal and others
.... Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL
Present : None for the appellants.
Mr. Surender Deswal, Advocate for respondents no.6 to 8.
None for respondents no.9 to 12.
L. N. MITTAL, J. (Oral) :
Order dated 15.10.2010 has not been complied with. Neither cost of adjournment has been deposited nor correct addresses of respondents no.2 to 4 have been furnished nor steps have been taken to implead legal representatives of respondents no.1 and 5 in spite of many last and final opportunities granted for the purpose. None is either appearing for the appellants today in spite of pass over.
Dismissed for non-prosecution.
Smt. Murti and others
Shanu Lal and others
L. N. MITTAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
