IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.3427 of 1989 (O&M) Date of Decision:05.05.2009 Gurcharan Singh .......Petitioner Versus Parshotam Lal ....Respondent Present: Mr. Sumit Sangwan, Advocate for the petitioner. None for th respondent. 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) Learned counsel, who had been appearing on behalf of the petitioner was reported to have died and therefore, the registry was directed to issue notices to the counsel for the petitioner as well as the respondent. The registry is reported that the petitioner could not be served since he is not residing at the given address in the civil revision. The respondent has also reported to have been died. Since neither the petitioner nor the counsel is on record to argue the case, the petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE May 05, 2009 Pankaj*