C.O.C.P. No. 955 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.- C.O.C.P. No. 955 of 2009 Date of Decision 9.7.2009 Raj Bala .... Petitioner. Versus Hari Kishan .... Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. Present:- None for the petitioner. Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. (oral) In this petition, the petitioner has alleged that vide order dated 13.11.2007 passed by this Court in FAO No. 260- M of 2007 the respondent was restrained from re-marrying. However, in grave violation of the aforesaid orders the respondent has remarried with one Sushila daughter of Ram Pal R/o Village Titoli, Tehsil and District Rohtak on 2.12.2007 and thus is guilty of committing contempt of this Court. As per the averments made in the petition, the petitioner had filed COCP No. 38 of 2008 alleging therein that respondent had performed second marriage. However, replying to the aforesaid contempt petition, respondent had denied his second marriage and COCP No.38 of 2008 was dismissed. It is further averred that now the petitioner has got an affidavit of one Kavita from which it is proved that respondent had married one Sushil daughter of Ram Pal on 2.12.2007 and thus the respondent is guilty of C.O.C.P. No. 955 of 2009 2 making a false statement in the Court and is liable to be punished. Vide order dated 18.5.2009, this Court had directed the petitioner to place on record a copy of order in COCP No. 38 of 2008. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, no such copy of order in COCP No. 38 of 2008 has been placed on record in this case. Even learned counsel for the petitioner is not present to assist this Court. From the aforesaid factual position, it seems that the petitioner is not interested in proceeding with the matter. Thus, I am not inclined to proceed further with this contempt petition. Rule discharged. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to seek any other appropriate remedy for redressal of her grievances in accordance with law. July 9, 2009 (Rakesh Kumar Garg) tripti Judge