Jammu & Kashmir High CourtDoulat Ram And Anr. vs Roop Chand And Others. on 11 October, 2018Author:Sanjeev KumarBench:Sanjeev KumarS.No.2
Supplementary-1

                  HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
                              AT JAMMU
RESC No.23/2018


                                                       Date of order: 11.10.2018
Doulat Ram and anr.                 v.                  Roop Chand and others.
Coram:
                  Hon'ble Mr Justice Sanjeev Kumar, Judge.
Appearance:
For the Petitioner/Appellant(s) : Mr. O.P.Thakur, Advocate.
For the Respondent(s)           :i) Whether approved for reporting in              Yes/No
Law journals etc.:ii) Whether approved for publication
in press:                                         Yes/No

         Issue notice to the respondents, returnable within four weeks.Requisites for service within one week.List on 27.11.2018.Learned counsel for the petitioners states that he has also filed an
application for interim relief but the same has not been registered by the
Registry. Accordingly, Registry is directed to number the application.
IA No......../2018
         The      petition   has   been   filed   by   the   appellant    for     re-
admission/restoration of the CFA being No.22/2013 titled Doulat Ram and
anr. v. Roop Chand and others, decided by this Court on 17.09.2018. Re-
admission has been sought on the ground that on the date the judgment was
pronounced or the date the arguments were heard and reserved, the appellant
was not present and it was only the respondents, who might have argued the
matter. Learned counsel further states that in view of the settled legalRESC No.23/2018                                                     Page 1 of 2position, if appellant is not present, the appeal can only be dismissed for non-
prosecution and cannot be decided on merits.I find merit in the submission made by learned counsel for the
petitioner, which is also supported by a judgment of the Supreme Court in
the case of Secretary, Dept. of Horiculture, Chandigarh and anr. v. Raghu
Raj; 2008 (13) SCC 395 and as well as a judgment of a Division Bench of
this Court rendered in the case ofGhulam Qadir and others v. Sikander and
others; 1981 SLJ 185.Notice in the MP as above.Meanwhile, subject to objections from the other side and till next date
of hearing, status quo with regard to the possession of the petitioners over
the property in question, as it exists today, shall be maintained.(Sanjeev Kumar)
                                                          Judge
Jammu
11.10.2018
Vinod.RESC No.23/2018                                                      Page 2 of 2