IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** FAO No.734 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION: 21.05.2010 **** Smt. Indira Kumari and another . . . . Appellants VS. Union of India and another . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN **** Present: - None for the appellants. None for respondent No.1. Mr.Tarundeep, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN J. (ORAL) There is a slip for adjournment on a printed performa, which states that the counsel prays for time “as he is in some personal difficulty and he has to go to District Sonepat”. A note has also been given “opposite counsel Sh. Jagdish Marwaha, Advocate informed telephonically”. Mr.Tarundeep, learned counsel for respondent No.2 has opposed the application for adjournment. Since no one has come forward to press written application to seek adjournment, therefore, the present appeal is hereby dismissed for non-prosecution. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) 21.05.2010 JUDGE Vivek