Mukhtiara Singh vs Gaindi & Ors.

S.P. Mehrotra, J.—It appears that by the order dated 8th Oct. 2004 passed by the O.S.D., notice was directed to be issued to the plaintiffappellant (Mukhtiara Singh) to engage another Counsel as Sri H.S. Nigam, who had been appearing as the learned Counsel for the plaintiffappellant, had expired.

It further appears that pursuant to the said order dated 8th Oct. 2004, notice was issued by Registered Post to the plaintiff appellant (Mukhtiara Singh) to engage another Counsel.

The Office Report dated 25th November, 2005 shows that the said notice, issued to the plaintiffappellant (Mukhtiara Singh) to engage another Counsel, has been returned back unserved with the remark by the Postman that the addressee (Mukhtiara Singh) has expired. The said endorsement by the Postman is dated 211 2004, as is'' evident from a perusal of the undelivered envelope wherein the said notice was sent.

Having regard to the said Office Report, the Court passed an order dated 15122005 directing the Office to submit report as to whether any Substitution Application had been filed. on behalf of the heirs and legal representatives of the said Mukhtiara Singh (plaintiffappellant).

Pursuant to the said order dated 15122005, the Office has submitted its Report dated 41 2006.

A perusal of the said Office Report dated 41 2006 shows that no Substitution Application has so far been filed on behalf of the heirs and legal representatives of the said Mukhtiara Singh (plaintiffappellant).

It may be mentioned that on various dates, mention was made on behalf of Sri S.S. Njgam, Advocate praying for time to obtain instructions in the matter. Time was, accordingly, granted to Sri S.S. Nigam, Advocate, as would be evident from a perusal of the orders dated 512006, 2012006 and 2712006 passed on the ordersheet.

Today, Sri Alok Kumar Srivastava, holding brief for Sri S.S. Nigam, Advocate has stated that Sri S.S. Nigam has no instructions the matter.

From the above narration of facts, it is evident that the said Mukhtiara Singh (plaintiffappellant) made by the Postman on 2nd November, 2004 on the undelivered envelope, wherein the said notice to engage another Counsel was sent by Registered Post.

It is further evident that no Substitution Application has so far been filed by the heirs and legal representatives of the said Mukhtiara Singh (plaintiffappellant).

In the circumstances, the Second Appeal, at the instance of the said Mukhtiara Singh, has stood abated.

The said Mukhtiara Singh was the sole plaintiffappellant.

Consequently, the Second Appeal stands dismissed as having abated.