JUDGMENT Hon’ble S.P. Mehrotra, J.—On account of failure on the part of the learned Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant in taking requisite steps for issuance of notices on Civil Misc. (Substitution) Application No. 4411 of 1991 (dated 3.9.1991), pursuant to the order dated 17.8.2006 passed on the said Substitution Application, the case is listed today under Chapter XII, Rule 4 of the Rules of the Court with the Office Report dated 2.1.2007. 2. Case has been taken-up in the revised list. Learned Counsel for the defendant-appellant are not present. 3. Even though the case is listed today under Chapter XII, Rule 4 of the Rules of the Court, requisite steps have not been taken. 4. In the circumstances, there is no option but to dismiss the aforesaid Substitution Application for want of prosecution under Chapter XII, Rule 4 of the Rules of the Court. 5. Accordingly, the aforesaid Civil Misc. Substitution Application No. 4411 of 1991 (dated 3.9.1991) is dismissed for want of prosecution under Chapter XII, Rule 4 of the Rules of the Court. 6. The aforesaid Substitution Application was filed consequent to the death of Smt. Ram Kunwar (plaintiff-respondent No. 1). 7. In view of the dismissal of the aforementioned Substitution Application for want of prosecution, the Second Appeal as against the said Smt. Ram Kunwar (plaintiff-respondent No. 1) stands abated. 8. The said Smt. Ram Kunwar (respondent No. 1 in the Second Appeal) was the sole plaintiff in the Suit giving rise to the present Second Appeal, while the respondent No. 2 as well as the appellant in the Second Appeal were the defendants in the said Suit. 9. In the circumstances, the Second Appeal stands dismissed as having abated. ———