PUNJAB WAKF BOARD Vs. RAJ RANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard learned Counsel for the Appellant. In spite of service of notice, the Defendant -Respondents have not appeared. It appears that after the death of the original Defendant during the pendency of the appeal in this Court, notices were issued to her legal representatives but no one appeared. Notices were also issued by substituted service by publication in the newspapers but no one turned up.

(2.) From the perusal of the impugned judgment passed by the High Court, it reveals that before the High Court also, none appeared for the Respondent.

(3.) The Appellant has assailed the impugned judgment of the High Court dismissing the second appeal and upholding the judgment passed by the first Appellate Court who reversed the judgment passed by the Trial Court.