Second appeal dismissed in default as appellants failed to appear; notice returned unserved with sons refusing acceptance, indicating disinterest in pursuing the appeal.
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.
S. No.222
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
RSA No.1376 of 2000 Date of Decision:23.09.2024 Shhinder Kaur and others .....Appellants Vs. Gurtej Singh and others .....Respondents
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA
Present:None for the appellants.
Mr. Binderjit Singh, Advocate for the respondents.
DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (Oral)
There is no representa�on on behalf of the appellants. No�ce issued to appellants No.1 and 2 has been received back with the report that none of them met and that their sons had refused to accept the no�ce. On the last date of hearing also, nobody had put in appearance on behalf of the appellants. The afore-said circumstances indicate that the appellants are no longer interested in pursuing the appeal.
Dismissed in default for want of prosecu�on.
September 23, 2024 ( DEEPAK GUPTA ) renu JUDGE Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No
RENU 2024.09.23 16:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
Shhinder Kaur and others
Gurtej Singh and others
Deepak Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
