Dismissed
Smt Satya Devi v. M//S Janindra Engineering Works and Ors.
Punjab & Haryana HCCR/3867/2003
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH…
What the court decided
AI extract
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH…
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.
229
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CR No.3867 of 2003 Date of Decision: 17.05.2024
Satya Devi
…Revisionist-Petitioner
Versus
M/s Janindra Engineering Works and another
…Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA Present:None for the revisionist-petitioner.
MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA, J . (Oral)
A perusal of the file reveals that vide the order dated 04.05.2004, the instant revision-petition had been adjourned sine-die with liberty to revive the same after the decision was rendered in RSA No.1567 of 1980 . The afore-referred RSA had, ultimately, been decided on 04.03.2010. Thereafter, the petitioner had approached the Apex Court, by way of filing SLP(C) No.29256 of 2010 and vide the order as passed on 26.05.2011, the present revision-petition had, again, been adjourned sinedie to await the decision of the above-said SLP and finally, the same had also been decided on 27.11.2015.
Since no application had been moved by the petitioner for seeking the revival of this revision-petition, therefore, the Registry had listed the same on 01.12.2023 and on that day, the petitioner remained unrepresented and hence, the notice was ordered to be issued to her for
NEETU RANI 2024.05.29 12:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment PHHC, CHD
CR No.3867 of 2003 -2-
15.12.2023. However, as reported by the Registry, the notice issued to the petitioner had been received back unserved with the report that there was no such village, as mentioned in her given address, in District Hoshiarpur. Then, the notice was, again, ordered to be issued to the petitioner and the same has been received back unserved with the report regarding her given address being incomplete.
In view of the afore-discussed facts and circumstances, this Court is left with no other option but to dismiss the revision-petition in hand for want of prosecution. Resultantly, the same stands dismissed accordingly.
17.05.2024 (MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) neetu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether Reportable: No
NEETU RANI 2024.05.29 12:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment PHHC, CHD
Satya Devi
M/s Janindra Engineering Works and another
MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court