Haryana

Ambala

EA/57/2012

ARUN KUMAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

KAMAL MARWAH - Opp.Party(s)

RAJESH KUMAR

05 May 2016

ORDER

                                                                                                                                                        EA No.57 of 2012

                                                                                Arun Kumar Vs. Kamal Marwah

Present:           None.

 

                        Case called several times since morning but neither decree holder nor his counsel  has put in appearance.  Let the case be taken up at 12.30 P.M.

                                                                             Sd/-                                           Sd/-

                                                                        Member                                   President

                                                                                                                        05.05.2016

Present:           None.

 

                        Case taken up at 12.30 P.M and called repeatedly but none has put in appearance on behalf of DH. In the interest of justice, the case be again taken up at 3.00 P.M.

                                                                            Sd/-                                        Sd/-

                                                                        Member                                   President

                                                                                                                        05.05.2016

 

Present:           None.

 

                        Case called repeatedly but neither decree holder nor his counsel has put in appearance.  Perusal of file reveals that JDs No.3 & 4 has complied with the order under execution of their part whereas the remaining compliance is to be made  by  JDs No.1 & 2.  Further perusal of record  shows that notices under section 25 of C.P. Act  issued to JDs No.1 & 2 were received back  with the report of postal authorities “left without address”. Thereafter, recovery proceedings under Land Revenue Act were initiated against the JDs No.1 & 2 but remained uneffected  for want of correct address of JDs No.1 & 2.   In view of the above, it is presumed that DH is not aware about the addresses of the JDs No.1 & 2 and thus is not interested in pursuing the present execution petition. As such, the same is dismissed in default  for want of prosecution. However, liberty is granted to DH to file fresh execution petition as and when addresss of JDs No.1 & 2 are available with him, if so advised. Copies of this order be sent to parties concerned free of costs, as per rules.  File after due compliance be consigned to record room.  

Announced: 05.05.2016.               

                                                                                 Sd/-                                      Sd/-

                                                                            Member                                   President