Smt. Ram Kala Devi Vs UOI & Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Smt. Ram Kala Devi Vs UOI & Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal dismissed for non-prosecution with liberty to the appellants to move an appropriate application within 06 weeks if any cause of action survives; pending applications disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the regular second appeal should be dismissed for non-prosecution, counsel for both sides having been unable to obtain fresh instructions from their clients. +1 more

Court's answer

The instant regular second appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution, as neither counsel for the appellants nor counsel for the respondents has received fresh instructions from their respective clients.

Ratio / Principle

Liberty is granted to the appellants to move an appropriate application within a period of 06 weeks from the date of the order, if any cause of action survives in the present appeal.

Key takeaways

Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

RSA-1239-2001 (O&M) — Smt. Ram Kala Devi and another v. Union of India and others (High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, 27.08.2025, Nidhi Gupta, J., oral): Second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 09.10.2000 of the learned Additional District Judge, Rewari, whereby the appeals of the respondent-defendants were allowed, reversing the judgment and decree dated 19.05.199 of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Rewari, in a matter concerning recovery of ₹59,000/- between the mother-in-law (respondent No. 3) and the daughter-in-law (plaintiff No. 1) arising on the demise of plaintiff No. 1's husband. Counsel for both sides reported that no fresh instructions had been received from their clients despite best efforts; service on the appellant stood confirmed by office report dated 22.08.2025. Held: the regular second appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution, with liberty to the appellants to move an appropriate application within 06 weeks if any cause of action survives; pending application(s), if any, stood disposed of. No issue on merits was adjudicated and no statute or precedent was cited.

RSA-1239-2001 (O&M) -1-

IN T HE HIGH COURT OF PUNJ A B AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGA R H

215 RS A -1239-2001 (O&M)

Dat e of Decision: 27.08.2025

Smt. Ram K ala Devi and another .… Appellants

Versus

Union of I n dia and others .... Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA

Present: - Mr. Ashish Gupta, Advocate f or the appellants.

None for respondent No. 1-U O I.

Mr. Akshay Kumar Goel, Ad v ocate for respondent No. 2.

Mr. Tapan Kumar, Advocate f or respondent No. 3.

NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL)

Appellant-plaintiffs are in second appeal against the judgment a nd decree dated 09.10.2000, p a ssed by the learned Additional District J u dge, Rewari, vide which the appeals filed by respondentdefendants herein were allowed reversing the judgment and decree dated 19.05.199, passed by the learned Civil Jud g e (Junior Division), Rewari. 2. The matter pertains to the ye a r 2001 and on the last date of hearing 06.02.2025, notices were ordered to be issued to the appellants. Office rep o rt dated 22.08.2025, indicates t hat the appellant has been duly served.

Learned counsel appearing f or the appellants submits that despite hi s best efforts, he has not recei v ed any fresh instruction in the matter fro m his clients. Similar is the su b mission of learned counsel for responden t s that despite their best efforts n o fresh instructions have been received f r om their respective clients. It i s further pointed out by learned

RISHU KATARIA 2025.08.29 10:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

RSA-1239-2001 (O&M) -2-

counsel fo r the parties that the dispute in t he present case is between the mother-in- l aw/respondent No. 3 herein a n d daughter-in-law for recovery of ₹59,00 0 /- on the demise of the husban d of plaintiff No. 1/daughter-inlaw of res p ondent No. 3.

Heard.

In view of the aforesaid pre m ise, the instant regular second appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution, with liberty to the appellants, to move a n appropriate application with i n a period of 06 weeks from today if a n y cause of action survives in the present appeal. Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to bot h the parties.

Pending application(s), if any , shall also stand disposed of.

27.08.2025 ( NIDHI GUPTA ) rishu JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No

Whether Reportable Yes/No

RISHU KATARIA 2025.08.29 10:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.