IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.3585 of 2001 (O&M) Date of Decision: 21.08.2009 Manjit Kaur .....Petitioner Versus Smt. Kulwant Kaur and others ...Respondents Present: None for the parties. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 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? -.- K. KANNAN J. (ORAL) 1. There is no representation for the petitioner at the time when the matter is called. It is seen from the records that even service to the respondent is not complete. Even then, I am of the view that there is not even a need to serve notice to the respondents since the matter that falls to be decided is whether the Court below is justified in refusing to restore the suit, which had been dismissed in default. The case where plaintiff had by her conduct allowed the suit be dismissed for default and she seeks for an adjudication relating to restoration, the conduct of the petitioner being not ready even today when the matter is called would only show that there has been a persistent conduct of negligence. 2. The civil revision is dismissed for default of appearance. No costs. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE August 21, 2009 Pankaj*