High Court of DelhiCRL.REV.P./555/2006

Urmil Bajaj v. Sudhir Nayar

2016-02-04Hon'Ble Ms. Justice Pratibha Rani1 pages

$~24 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.REV.P. 555/2006 URMIL BAJAJ ..... Petitioner Through:

Proxy counsel (appearance not given).

versus SUDHIR NAYAR ..... Respondent Through:

Mr. V.S. Chauhan, Advocate

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI

O R D E R

% 04.02.2016 1.

Proxy counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that main counsel is busy in another Court. He further submits that the main counsel has the instructions from the petitioner to withdraw this revision petition. 2.

Proxy counsel for the petitioner seeks Passover. 3.

Be awaited.

PRATIBHA RANI, J.

FEBRUARY 04, 2016/'aky'

Despite many passovers, neither the main counsel nor the proxy counsel for the petitioner appeared. The proxy counsel when appeared at the first call informed that the main counsel has the instructions from the petitioner to withdraw this revision petition. Since has appeared on behalf of the petitioner despite many Passovers, the revision petition is dismissed in default as well as for nonprosecution. PRATIBHA RANI, J.

FEBRUARY 04, 2016 'aky'