Disposed¶21

Mukhtiar Singh and Anr. v. Bawa Singh

Punjab & Haryana HC1 Aug 2025RSA/2401/1999

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

RSA-2401-1999 (O&M); Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh; Justice Nidhi Gupta; decided 01.08.2025; second appeal disposed of for non-prosecution after pendency of more than 25 years; liberty to parties to seek revival within 02 months; appellant No.1 died; appellant No.2 and respondent refused notice, service through affixation; previous counsel expired; impugned judgment and decree dated 30.3.1999 of Additional District Judge, Barnala setting aside decree dated 20.10.1994 of Sub Judge 1st Class, Barnala; Mukhtiar Singh and another v. Bawa Singh; no statute or precedent discussed.

What did the court decide?

Appeal disposed of with liberty to the parties to move an appropriate application within 02 months for reviving the same, if so advised; pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. ¶21

Mukhtiar Singh and Anr. Vs Bawa Singh — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

RSA-2401-1999 (O & M)

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

201 Regular Second Appeal No. 2 401 of 1999 (O & M) Date of decision :-01.08.2025

¶5

Mukhtiar Singh and another

…..Appellants

Versus

Bawa Singh

…..Respondent

CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA

¶11

Present:Dr. Sukant Gupta, Advocate for the appellants.

¶12

NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral)

¶13

The appellants/plaintiffs are in the present regular second appeal a g ainst the judgment and decree d ated 30.3.1999 passed by the learned A dditional District Judge, Bar n ala whereby the appeal has been acc e pted and the judgment and de c ree dated 20.10.1994 passed by the le a rned Sub Judge 1^st Class, Barna l a has been set aside.

¶14

On the last date of hearing i.e. 04.2.2025 there was no represent a tion on behalf of any of the par t ies.

¶15

Learned counsel appearing fo r the appellants informs that the prev i ous counsel representing the appellants has expired and therefore , prays for issuance of fresh noti c e to the appellants.

¶16

However, the record indi c ates that fresh notice was issued to the parties whereupon the ser v ice report has been received that appe l lant No.1 has died; appellant N o.2 and the sole respondent have refused to accept notice and they se r ved through affixation.

¶17

VIJAY ASIJA 2025.08.02 12.54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶18

¶19

RSA-2401-1999 (O & M)

¶20

In the aforesaid premise, iss u ance of fresh notice to the parties would be a futile exercise. It ap p ears that due to sheer long pendenc y of the present appeal before thi s Court for a period of more than 25 y ears, the parties have lost inter e st in pursuing the same, as no attem p t has been made by them to contact their counsel or to engage a new counsel.

¶21

Be that as it may, in view of the foregoing circumstances, the insta n t appeal is disposed of , with li b erty to the parties, to move an appro p riate application within a peri o d of 02 months from today for revivi n g the same, if so, advised.

¶22

Copy of this order be sent to the parties.

¶23

Pending application(s), if an y , shall stands disposed of.

¶24

August 0 1 , 2025 ( NIDHI GUPTA ) Vijay Asija JUDGE

¶25

Whether sp e aking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Re p ortable Yes / No

¶26

VIJAY ASIJA 2025.08.02 12.54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Mukhtiar Singh and Anr. v. Bawa Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukhtiar Singh and Anr. v. Bawa Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohammad Anis Vs Ms. Marzia

Pritam Singh and Ors. Vs Hari and Ors.

Amandeep Singh Vs Ajit Balaji Joshi IAS and Others

Satish Kumar Vs Ashok Kumar and Ors.

Prithvi Raj (Since Deceased) through His Lrs Vs Pargan Ram and Another

Jagdeep Singh Vs Jagdish Arora and Others