R.S.A No. 2145 of 1983 (O&M) ::1:: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A No. 2145 of 1983 (O&M) Date of decision : January 07, 2010 Manohar, ...... Appellant (s) v. Nihal Chand and another, ...... Respondent(s) *** CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI *** Present : Mr. Parbodh Mittal, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. J.L.Malhotra, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mrs. Pratibha Yadav, Advocate for respondent No.2. *** AJAY TEWARI, J (Oral) Mr. Mittal has appeared for the appellant. However, I pointed out to him that by order dated 1.10.2008, C.M No.8482 C of 2008 moved by the appellant was allowed whereby he had sought permission to engage a new counsel. Shri Mittal states that he has no knowledge about the same. He, however, states that in case this is so, he would have no objection in not appearing in the case. I find that despite having moved the application and having been granted permission, no counsel has been engaged by the appellant. In R.S.A No. 2145 of 1983 (O&M) ::2:: the circumstances, I am constrained to dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. Mr. Mittal further states that since the brief of the case is with him, he may be allowed to verify this fact. Needless to state that Mr. Mittal would be at liberty to verify the above fact and if he finds that the facts so warrant he will move an application for recalling of this order. Dismissed in default. ( AJAY TEWARI ) January 07, 2010. JUDGE `kk'