JUDGMENT Hon’ble S.P. Mehrotra, J.—The case is listed today under Chapter XII, Rule 4 of the Rules of the Court. Case has been taken-up in the revised list. None is present for either of the parties. 2. A perusal of the record shows that Civil Misc. (Delay Condonation) Application No. 1170 of 1983 (dated 24.3.1983) and Civil Misc. (Substitution) Application No. .....of 1983 (dated 24.3.1983) were filed on behalf of Hira Lal, inter alia, praying for being substituted in place of Beni Madhav (plaintiff-appellant), who was stated to have expired on 27.2.1979. 3. The aforementioned Applications were dismissed by the Court by its order dated 4.11.1988 as against the defendants-respondents Nos. 1 and 2 on account of failure of the plaintiff-appellant in taking requisite steps for service of notice on the said defendants-respondents. 4. It further appears that another Substitution Application being Civil Misc. (Substitution) Application No. 1704 of 1979 (dated 2.7.1979) was filed on behalf of one Om Prakash, inter alia, praying for being substituted in place of the said Beni Madhav (plaintiff-appellant). 5. By the order dated 29.2.1980, the Court directed for issuance of notice on the aforesaid Civil Misc. Application No. 1704 of 1979 (dated 2.7.1979). 6. On account of failure on the part of the applicant in the aforesaid Civil Misc. Application No. 1704 of 1979 (dated 2.7.1979) in taking requisite steps, the case is listed today under Chapter XII, Rule 4 of the Rules of the Court with the Office Report dated 19.6.2007/4.7.2007. 7. Further, on account of failure to take steps for issuance of notices to the defendants-respondents in respect of the Second Appeal, the matter is listed today under Chapter XII, Rule 4 of the Rules of the Court. 8. Even though the case is listed today under Chapter XII, Rule 4 of the Rules of the Court, requisite steps have not been taken. In the circumstances, there is no option but to dismiss the Second Appeal as well as the aforesaid Civil Misc. Application No. 1704 of 1979 (dated 2.7.1979) for want of prosecution as against the defendants-respondents Nos. 1 and 2. 9. Accordingly, the Second Appeal as well as the aforesaid Civil Misc. Application No. 1704 of 1979 (dated 2.7.1979) is dismissed for want of prosecution as against the defendants-respondents Nos. 1 and 2. 10. The defendants-respondents Nos. Application No. 1704 of 1979 (dated 2.7.1979) for want of prosecution as against the defendants-respondents Nos. 1 and 2. 9. Accordingly, the Second Appeal as well as the aforesaid Civil Misc. Application No. 1704 of 1979 (dated 2.7.1979) is dismissed for want of prosecution as against the defendants-respondents Nos. 1 and 2. 10. The defendants-respondents Nos. 1 and 2 are the only respondents in the Second Appeal, therefore, the Second Appeal stands dismissed for want of prosecution under Chapter XII, Rule 4 of the Rules of the Court. ————