IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.2566 of 1993(O&M) Date of Decision: 16.08.2012 Purshotam Lal son of Bhura Ram resident of Mohalla No.11, Jalandhar Cantt and another. ... Petitioners Versus Ganpat Ram son of Sh. Makhan Lal resident of House No.2/5, Mohalla No.12, Jalandhar Cantt. ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN Present:None for the petitioners. Mr. Deepak Thapar, Advocate, for the respondent. ***** 1.Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? NO 2.To be referred to the reporters or not? NO 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest? NO K. KANNAN, J. (Oral) 1. The case is posted today finally on the request of the counsel appearing on behalf of the tenant-petitioner. At the time when the matter is called only the counsel for the respondent is present. He states that the tenant has surrendered the possession of the property. 2. I merely take the statement but I would find the absence of the counsel or the party, namely, the revision petitioner as itself a ground for dismissal. The civil revision is dismissed for default. 16th August, 2012 ( K. KANNAN ) Rajan JUDGE