Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Dr.K.Dc.Bhatia Vs Vinod Kumar Garg — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Home
Punjab & Haryana HC
2025
Dr.K.Dc.Bhatia Vs Vinod Kumar GargDr.K.Dc.Bhatia v. Vinod Kumar Garg

Dismissed¶15

Dr.K.Dc.Bhatia v. Vinod Kumar Garg

Punjab & Haryana HC5 Dec 2025RSA/3146/1999

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

RSA-3146-1999 | Dr. K.C. Bhatia vs Vinod Kumar Garg | Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh | Mandeep Pannu, J. (oral) | decided 05.12.2025 | dismissal for want of prosecution | notice to sole appellant returned unserved | no such person resides at given address | none for appellant | respondent ex parte order dated 10.09.2025 | pending applications disposed | no statute or precedent discussed.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution; all pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. ¶15

Why is it important?

The court found that the appellant is not interested in pursuing the appeal any further, notice to the sole appellant having been received back unserved. ¶14

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution; all pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the second appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution where notice to the sole appellant was returned unserved and nobody appeared for the appellant.

Court's answer

The court found that the appellant is not interested in pursuing the appeal any further, notice to the sole appellant having been received back unserved.

Ratio / Principle

The appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.

Key takeaways

All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of along with the dismissal of the appeal.obiter¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh (Mandeep Pannu, J., oral): Regular Second Appeal RSA-3146-1999, Dr. K.C. Bhatia v. Vinod Kumar Garg, decided 05.12.2025 — dismissed for want of prosecution. Notice issued to the sole appellant came back unserved with the report that no such person resides at the given address; none appeared for the appellant; the respondent had earlier been proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 10.09.2025. The Court held the appellant not interested in pursuing the appeal and dismissed it, disposing of all pending applications, if any. No substantive question of law was decided; the judgment is marked speaking/reasoned: Yes, reportable: Yes/No.

A

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Sr. No.213

RSA-3146-1999 Date of Decision: 05.12.2025

DR. K.C. BHATIA ....Appellant

Versus

VINOD KUMAR GARG ....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU

Present:None for the appellant.

Respondent proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 10.09.2025.

MANDEEP PANNU, J. (Oral)

Notice issued to sole appellant received back unserved with the

report that no such person resides at the given address.

In view of the above, it appears that the appellant is not interested in pursuing the present appeal any further.

Hence, the same is dismissed for want of prosecution.

All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

05.12.2025

(MANDEEP PANNU) JUDGE

mahima

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : Yes/No

MAHIMA 2025.12.05 16:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the second appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution where notice to the sole appellant was returned unserved and nobody appeared for the appellant.medium confidence¶14
The court held
The court found that the appellant is not interested in pursuing the appeal any further, notice to the sole appellant having been received back unserved.ratio¶14

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
Respondent proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 10.09.2025.¶9
Prior proceeding
None appeared for the appellant when the appeal was taken up.¶8
Prior proceeding
Notice issued to the sole appellant was received back unserved.¶12
Prior proceeding
The service report recorded that no such person resides at the given address.¶13

Parties & counsel

AI extract

appellant
Dr. K.C. Bhatia¶4
respondent
Vinod Kumar Garg¶6

Coram

AI extract

Mandeep Pannuauthor¶7

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Punjab & Haryana HC
Decided on: 5 Dec 2025 · December
Registered: 5 May 5500
Case no.: RSA/3146/1999
CNR: PHHC010463851999
Bench: Mandeep Pannu
Disposal: DISMISSED
Case type: RSA

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Mandeep Pannu

Surinder Nath Vs Naranjan Dass
4 Dec 2025
Punjab State Civil Supplies Vs Mulkh Raj
4 Dec 2025
Lal Singh Vs Tsatynaryan Sharma
4 Dec 2025
Balbir Singh Vs Vishwjeet Singh
5 Dec 2025
Prem Lata and Anr. Vs State of Punjab
5 Dec 2025
Jagdish Kailey Vs Balbir Kaur
5 Dec 2025

Cite this judgement

Dr.K.Dc.Bhatia v. Vinod Kumar Garg, RSA/3146/1999 (P&H), decided on 5 December 2025.

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Procedural history4

Respondent proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 10.09.2025.
None appeared for the appellant when the appeal was taken up.

View full history

Bench / Coram

Mandeep Pannu

Parties & counsel