IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. R.S.A. No. 18 of 2002. Decided on: 29th November, 2011. ____________________________________________________ Mam Chand. …Petitioner. -Versus- Jagan Nath and others. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 ____________________________________________________ For the appellant : None. For the respondents : Mr. Janesh Gupta, Advocate vice Mr. Neeraj Gupta, Advocate. ------------------------------------------------------ Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): In sequel to order dated 13.10.2011, the notice was issued to the appellant. As per the report of Registry, the notice has been received back with a report that the appellant has also expired. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed having abated, so also the pending application(s), if any. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge November 29, 2011. (bhupender) 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?. - 2 - `