ORDER

Suresh Kait, J.

Cont. Case (C) No. 165/2008

1. In the instant case, notice was issued vide order dated 17.03.2008 and could not be adjudicated due the following reasons.

2. Thereafter CM. No. 11170/2008 was moved by the applicants / respondent No. 1 & 2, i.e., Sonia Khosla and her husband Deepak Khosla, and sought recall of order dated 17.03.2008. As alleged in the said application, the Petitioner has managed to obtain notice by misrepresenting the true and correct facts and on 08.08.2008 this court passed an order which is as under:-

"In my opinion the correct remedy of the applicants is to file a respondent(sic) and get the notice discharged"

"Reserving rights of the respondents to urge all pleas in response to the notice issued in the contempt petition the instant application is dismissed."

3. Thereafter, CM No. 14125/2008, CM No. 14126/2008, CM No. 16972/08 and CM No. 16973/2008 were moved by the applicants/ respondents. Thereon, it is recorded in the order dated 04.12.2008 that: -

"Respondent submits that no notice of the applications is required to be served in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pritish v. State of Maharashtra (2002 SC 236)."

4. Thereafter CM N