RSA No.3759 of 2009 (O&M) 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh RSA 3759 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 13.01.2011 Satish and others ......Appellants Versus Krisgab Dutt and others .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.Sandeep Singh, Advocate, for the appellants Mr.Munish Kumar Garg,Advocate for Mr.A.K.Jain,Advocate for the respondents Appellant No.5 in person. **** SABINA, J. Plaintiffs had filed the suit for possession. The suit filed by the plaintiffs was decreed by the trial Court vide judgment and decree dated 13.02.2009. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, the defendants preferred an appeal. The appeal filed by the defendants was dismissed by the District Judge Jind vide judgment and decree dated 6.8.2009. Hence, the present appeal. During the pendency of the appeal on 22.12.2010, the following order was passed by this Court:- "On 19.11.2010 learned counsel for the appellants submitted before this Court that a compromise has been effected between the parties and,therefore, a short adjournment be granted to place on record the compromise RSA No.3759 of 2009 (O&M) 2 arrived at between the parties. The case was adjourned to 8.12.2010 to enable the counsel for the appellants to do the needful. On 8.12.2010, Mr.Vikas Chaudhary,Advocate appeared for the counsel for the appellants and pleaded no instructions regarding the alleged compromise arrived at between the parties and sought adjournment on the ground that counsel for the appellants is not well. Today, Sh.,Sandeep Singh, learned counsel for the appellants has appeared before this Court and has submitted on instructions from appellant NO.1, who is present in Court, that the compromise talks have failed between the parties. Keeping in view the conflicting stand taken by the counsel for the appellants on earlier dates, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case where provisions of Order 41 Rule 10 CPC must be invoked and the appellant be directed to deposit security for the costs of the appeal before he is heard further on merits. Let the appellant deposit a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with the Registry of this Court as security of the costs as provided under Order 41 Rule 10 CPC before the next date of hearing, List on 13.1.2011. Sd/- December 22,2010 RAKESH KUMAR GARG JUDGE” Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the appellants were unable to deposit the security in terms of the above RSA No.3759 of 2009 (O&M) 3 order. In these circumstances, in terms of Order 41 Rule 10(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, this appeal is rejected. (SABINA) JUDGE January 13, 2011 arya