IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Arb. Appeal No.: 2 of 2011. Decided on: 28.07.2011. ___________________________________________ Vijay Khanna. … Appellant. Versus Deepak Arora and another. … Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Appellant : Mr. Satyen Vaidya and Mr. Bimal Gupta, Advocates. For the Respondents : Mr. R.L. Sood, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ashwani K. Sharma, Advocate Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): Mr. Satyen Vaidya, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the power of attorney shall be filed during the course of the day. 2. It is submitted by Mr. Satyen Vaidya, learned counsel for the appellant that the directions issued by this Court have been complied with in letter and spirit. In view of 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. - 2 - this, the present appeal is rendered infructuous. Consequently, the same is dismissed having become infructuous. However, it shall be open to the respondents to point out if any part of the order has not been complied with, before the learned Arbitrator. The pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge. July 28, 2011. (sck).