The High Court affirms the principle that lack of appearance by the appellant, even at the preliminary hearing stage before issuance of notice of motion, is sufficient ground for dismissal of a Regular Second Appeal for non-prosecution. This judgment follows existing practice and can be cited as binding precedent for courts dealing with similarly abandoned appeals in civil matters.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | RSA/3469/2023 of ST JOSEPHS INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL AND OTHERS Vs KULDEEP TRADING COMPANY |
| CNR | PHHC010730942021 |
| Date of Registration | 30-10-2023 |
| Decision Date | 30-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISMISSED |
| Judgment Author | MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN |
| Court | High Court of Punjab and Haryana |
| Precedent Value | Binding—confirms power to dismiss appeals for non-prosecution |
| Type of Law | Civil Procedure |
| Ratio Decidendi |
The High Court reaffirmed that if appellants fail to appear at the preliminary hearing stage and demonstrate no interest in prosecuting their regular second appeal, the court is justified in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution. This power may be exercised even before the issuance of notice of motion, following a pattern of repeated non-appearance by the appellant. The order is made in the interest of judicial efficiency and finality. The judgment does not create new law but applies settled principles on the dismissal of cases for want of prosecution. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court |
The appeal pertained to the year 2023 and remained pending at the preliminary hearing, with notice of motion yet to be issued. Repeated adjournments were granted due to non-appearance of the appellants on multiple dates. Despite being called twice on the date of decision, no one appeared for the appellants. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate civil courts within the jurisdiction of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts resolving similar procedural defaults. |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Confirms that persistent non-appearance by appellants, at even the preliminary hearing stage before issuance of notice of motion, empowers courts to dismiss regular second appeals for non-prosecution.
- Lawyers must ensure diligent follow-up and timely appearances, as habitual absence can lead to dismissal regardless of the stage of proceedings.
- No new legal standard is established; the judgment reiterates and applies existing practice.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Court noted the prolonged period during which appellants failed to appear, despite repeated adjournments and the case being called twice on the date of hearing.
- The judgment reasoned that the appellants’ conduct demonstrated disinterest in pursuing the appeal.
- As a result, in the interest of justice and judicial process, the Court exercised its discretion to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution at the preliminary stage, even before the issuance of notice of motion.
Arguments by the Parties
No arguments by either party are recorded in the judgment as neither side appeared at the hearing.
Factual Background
The appeal was filed in 2023 in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana and remained at the preliminary hearing stage, with notice of motion yet to issue. There were repeated adjournments because no one appeared for the appellants, culminating in non-appearance even after the case was called twice on the date of decision. Consequently, the Court inferred that the appellants were not interested in pursuing their appeal.
Statutory Analysis
The judgment does not discuss specific statutory provisions but applies the general principle of dismissal for non-prosecution in civil procedure.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – The decision affirms and applies the existing principle that courts have discretion to dismiss appeals for non-prosecution following repeated non-appearance by appellants.