Priti Pratap Singh v. The Sariska Palace & ORS

V\5 $-31 to 33 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CONT.CAS(C) 530/2013 PRITIPRATAP SINGH Through:

Petitioner Ms. Tasneem Ahmadi and Ms.

Shubhi Kharl, Advs.

versus THE SARISKA PALACE & ORS.

Through:

None.

Respondents + CONT.CAS(C) 491/2014 Pe|titioner Ms. Tasneem Ahmadi anil Ms.

Shubhi Kharl, Advs.

PRITI PRATAP SINGH Through:

versus THE SARISKA PALACE & ORS Through:

None.

Respondents + CONT.CAS(C) 492/2014 Petitioner Ms. Tasneem Ahmadi and Ms.

Shubhi Kharl, Advs.

PRITI PRATAP SINGH Through:

versus Respondents THE SARISKA PALACE & ORS Through:

None.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR.

JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA %

ORDER

27.01.2016 1.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that she has no' instructions from the petitioner in these matters. It is further submitted that a letter dated 19^^ January, 2016 was sent to the petitioner but no response has been By:AMULYA

^6 received in respect thereof. Copy of letter dated 19^'' January, 2016 has been placed on record.

2.

It appears that the petitioner is not interested to pursue these petitions. 3.

The petitions are dismissed in default. ^ J.R. MIDHA, J.

JANUARY 27, 2016 ak