- (1.) S. P. Mehrotra, J. On account of failure on the part of the learned Counsel for the defendants-appellants to take requisite steps for issuance of notice on the Appeal to the defendants- respondents Nos. 2, 3/1 and 3/2 and the proforma plaintiffs-respondents Nos. 4 and 5, pursuant to the order dated 7-5-1987 passed by the Joint Registrar read with the order dated 1-8-2006 passed by the Court, the case is listed today under Chapter XII, Rule 4 of the Rules of the Court.
(2.) THE Office has submitted its Report dated 7-8-2006. The case has been taken-up in the revised list. Learned Counsel for the defendants-appellants are not present. Smt. Shobha Srivastava holding brief for Shri S. M. Dayal, learned Counsel for the plaintiffs- respondents Nos. 1/1 to 1/3 is present. Even though the case is listed today under Chapter XII Rule 4 of the Rules of the Court, requisite steps have not been taken.
(3.) IN the circumstances, the Second Appeal is liable to be dismissed for want of prosecution under Chapter XII, Rule 4 of the Rules of the Court, as against the defendants-respondents Nos. 2, 3/1 and 3/2 and the proforma plaintiffs- respondents Nos. 4 and 5. Further, as none is present for the defendants-appellants, the Second Appeal itself is liable to be dismissed for want of prosecution.;