FAO No.921 of 2008 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.921 of 2008 (O&M) Date of Decision. 15.03.2011 Sunil Kumar son of Shri Raghuvir and another ......Appellants Versus National Insurance Company Limited through its Divisional Manager, Rohtak, Distt. Rohtak and another .....Respondents Present: Proxy counsel for Mr. Ram Darshan Yadav, Advocate for the appellants. 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 a request for adjournment by proxy counsel appearing for the counsel on record. I have seen from the file that ever since the institution of the appeal on 08.01.2007 there has not been one single instance where the counsel for the appellant has ever been ready. At one stage, the appeal had been dismissed for default, which was later restored to file. There had been a plea by him for prosecuting the appeal without making even the statutory deposit and that was again not accepted and he was called upon to pay the amount. For the last more than 10 occasions, there have been only pleas for adjournment either in writing or at the instance of the counsel on his behalf or by some counsel making the plea on behalf of the counsel on record. 2. The conduct of the counsel is most undesirable and deprecatory. The appeal is dismissed for default of non-prosecution FAO No.921 of 2008 (O&M) -2- with costs of Rs.5,000/- payable to the Mediation Centre, P&H High Court, Chandigarh. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE March 15, 2011 Pankaj*