C.O.C.P. No. 1814 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.- C.O.C.P. No. 1814 of 2008 Date of Decision 9.7.2009 Hira Lal & Anr. .... Petitioners Versus Vijay Kain .... Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. Present:- Mr. Ritesh Pandey, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Rajesh Garg, Additional Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent. Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. (oral) The grievance raised in this petition, by the petitioner is that in spite of the directions dated 3.4.2008 issued by this Court in C.W.P.No. 5555 of 2008, legal notice, of the petitioner was not decided. On 2.7.2009, Mr. Rajesh Garg, Additional A.G., Punjab appearing on behalf of respondent, had stated on instructions that legal notice issued by the petitioner was decided by the respondent vide order dated 24.7.2008 and a copy of the aforesaid order was endorsed to Mr. Vipin Mahajan, Advocate, who was the counsel of the petitioner. The present petition was filed by the petitioner without disclosing this fact and, therefore, petitioner was asked to explain the conduct by filing an affidavit. In his affidavit filed in Court today the petitioner has not C.O.C.P. No. 1814 of 2008 2 specifically denied the factum of the receipt of order dated 24.7.2008 by Sh. Vipin Mahajan who was admitted his counsel earlier. Petitioner has also filed an affidavit in compliance of the order dated 2.7.2009 and the same is taken on record. Short affidavit on behalf of respondent, filed in Court also taken on record. In the reply filed on behalf of respondent, order Annexure R-1 bearing No. E-10-Pb-08/536 dated 24.7.2008 has been placed on record vide which legal notice of the petitioner was decided. I am not inclined to proceed further with this contempt petition. Rule discharged. However, it will be open to the petitioner to seek their remedy against the order dated 24.7.2008 in accordance with law. July 9, 2009 (Rakesh Kumar Garg) tripti Judge