IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 3135 of 2010 Date of Decision: 21.07.2010 Om Parkash Kalia .... Petitioner Versus Tarlochan Dass and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present :- Ms. Gagandeep Kaur, Advocate for Mr. B.R. Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Ashish Aggarwal, Advocate for the respondents 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? ALOK SINGH, J. (ORAL) 1. Mr. R.K. Aggarwal, Advocate has filed affidavit in pursuance to the order dated 29.6.2010. In the affidavit of Mr. R.K. Aggarwal, Advocate, it has been mentioned that respondent No. 1 Tarlochan Dass has expired on 11.9.2006. 2. Vide impugned order dated 30.4.2010, first Appellate Court declined the request of the plaintiff-petitioner to withdraw the suit with permission to file fresh suit on the same cause of action. 3. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, I am satisfied that permission to withdraw the suit with liberty to file fresh suit ought to have been granted. Moreover, in the change circumstances that defendant-respondent No. 1 had expired prior to 30.4.2010, plaintiff should have been permitted to withdraw the suit with liberty to file fresh suit. C.R. No. 3135 of 2010 2 4. Present petition is allowed. Impugned order is set aside. Application moved by plaintiff-petitioner is allowed and plaintiff is permitted to withdraw the suit with liberty to file fresh suit. (ALOK SINGH) 21.07.2010 JUDGE reena