Appeal by claimants dismissed in default for want of prosecution as neither appellants nor their counsel appeared on successive hearings despite the matter being listed for effective hearing.
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 & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
220
IOIN-FAO-5492-2010 in/and FAO-5492-2010 Date of Decision: 02.08.2024
LALMANI AND ORS.
…..Appellants
Vs.
RAMESH CHAND AND ORS.
…..Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA
Present: None for the appellant-claimants.
None for respondent No.3-Insurance Company.
DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL)
A wri�en request for adjournment has been received from learned counsel for respondent No.3-Insurance Company. However, nobody has put in appearance on behalf of the appellants-claimants. Even on the last date of hearing, when the ma�er was taken up for effec)ve hearing, nobody had appeared on behalf of the appellants-claimants.
It appears that appellants-claimants are no longer interested in pursuing this appeal.
Dismissed in default for want of prosecu)on.
02.08.2024 pry
( DEEPAK GUPTA ) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No
PRIYANKA 2024.08.02 18:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Lalmani and ors.
Ramesh Chand and ors.
Deepak Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
