IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. RSA No.1726 of 2010 Date of decision:3.8.2010 Baljinder Singh .....Appellant v. Puran Singh ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. Present: Mr.Gunjan rishi, Advocate, for Mr.Ashok K.Saini, Advocate, for the appellant. Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral) A request has been made on behalf of the counsel for the appellant for an adjournment. It may be noticed that on the last three dates also this appeal was adjourned on the request of counsel for the appellant. Thus, I find no justification to adjourn the case further. Prayer is declined. Since Mr.Gunjan Rishi, Advocate, who has made the request for an adjournment is not in a position to assist this Court in the case on merits, thus, I have no option but to dismiss this appeal keeping in view of observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Smt.Poonam v.Sumit Tanwar, AIR 2010 SC 1384, in which the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed that the Court is not obliged to decide the case on merits if necessary assistance is not provided to the Court. The relevant observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reads as follows:- “ In absence of proper assistance to Court by the lawyer, there is no obligation on the part of the Court to decide the case, for the simple reason that unless the lawyer renders the proper assistance to the Court, the Court is not able to decide the case. It is not for the court itself to decide the controversy. The counsel cannot just raise the issues in his petition and leave it RSA No.1726 of 2010 -2- to the Court to give its decision on those points after going through the record and determining the correctness thereof. It is not for the Court itself to find out what the points for determination can be and then proceed to give a decision on those points. In case counsel for the party is not able to render any assistance, the Court may decline to entertain the petition.” In this view of the matter, this appeal is dismissed. ( Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge August 3, 2010 rk