IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 19132 of 2008 Date of Decision: 19. 11. 2008 Kamlesh Girdhar ...... Petitioner Versus Union Territory, Chandigarh and others ...... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.M. Kumar Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Tewari Present: Mr.Rajinder Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. *** 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? *** M. M. Kumar, J. On 10.11.2008 we have passed the following order:- “ During the course of arguments, two queries were posed to the learned counsel for the petitioner on account of delay in responding to the offer of possession made by the respondents. Firstly, we asked the learned counsel as to whether the petitioner had adequate amount available with her when the instalments were required to be deposited because she has deposited 10% of the amount of Rs. 72, 000/- on 1.12.1998 and Rs. 1,08,000/- i.e. 15% on 6.1.1999 and 7.1.1999. The next instalment was required to be paid on 11.12.1999 amounting to Rs. 2,17, 139/- and the next instalment on 11.12.2000 of equivalent amount was required to be paid. The petitioner is required to show that till 2001 she had adequate amount to meet the demand of payment of instalment. Secondly, the petitioner is also required to furnish the proof that she had ever sent representation dated 3.7.2001 (Annexure P-3) because admittedly the same has not been sent CWP No. 19132 of 2008 -2- under the registered AD cover. List again on 19.11.2008.” Learned counsel for the petitioner requests for further time to enable him to place on record the necessary information and documents. However, it would be appropriate to direct the petitioner to file a fresh writ petition after placing on record the information required by order dated 10.11.2008 or any other additional information, which the petitioner may file in support of the petition. Petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh one on the same cause of action. (M. M. KUMAR) JUDGE (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE November 19, 2008 sunita