Appeal heard on defaults; no counsel appeared for appellants in first or second round. Court dismissed the appeal for non-prosperution.
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
206 FAO-1370-1991 Date of decision: 13.03.2023
PARKASH SINGH AND OTHERS
..Appellants
Versus
TARSEM SINGH AND OTHERS
..Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA
Present: None for the appellants.
Mr. Aseem Aggarwal, Advocate for the insurance company.
NIDHI GUPTA, J (Oral)
This is an appeal of the year 1991. On the last date of hearing i.e. 03.03.2023, matter was adjourned at the request of learned counsel for the appellants and it was made clear that no further adjournment shall be granted. Even today in the second round, no one appears for the appellants. It seems that appellants are not interested in pursuing this appeal.
Dismissed for non prosecution.
( NIDHI GUPTA ) 13.03.2023 JUDGE ashok
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No
ASHOK KUMAR 2023.03.14 14:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Parkash Singh and others
Tarsem Singh and others
Nidhi Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
