Vish Puri Series

by Impedimenta Fri Oct 10, 2014 9:50 am

I ended up reading The case of the man who died laughing before the rest of the series. My take: a simple, straight forward but gripping mystery. Definitely not as twisted or dark or even complicated as the ones I am used to, the brit whodunits, but engaging enough.

Vivid characterization and the stunning visual appeal from the sight, sounds and smells of India flowing through the narrative made this book enjoyable for me, given the basic plot.

Sometimes, especially towards the end, it seemed like Hall’s narration is oddly detached from the characters, setting, and action of the novel. Almost like the narration and the scene set up were done separately and patched together.

Nevertheless, I am completing this series.

by Guest Fri Oct 10, 2014 10:02 am

Impedimenta wrote:
Vivid characterization and the stunning visual appeal from the sight, sounds and smells of India flowing through the narrative made this book enjoyable for me, given the basic plot.

Are the sight, sounds and smells of Delhi same as rest of India, Chennai included? I have been led to believe otherwise.

by swapna Fri Oct 10, 2014 10:17 am

that was a splendid review. your criticism of the author's detachment from the scene he had set up is insightful, although I had not come across that in "the case of the deadly butter chicken."

the latter, with its cricket intrigue, has a complex plot.

I wish you'd write more reviews.

by Hellsangel Fri Oct 10, 2014 10:20 am

Here is another review:

http://chamberfour.com/2010/07/29/review-the-case-of-the-man-who-died-laughing/ wrote:In short, Hall’s narration is oddly detached from the characters, setting, and action of the novel. There’s a good mystery in the heart of this book, but Hall does everything in his power to curb your enjoyment of it.

by swapna Fri Oct 10, 2014 10:34 am

Hellsangel wrote:Here is another review:

http://chambertfour.com/2010/07/29/review-the-case-of-the-man-who-died-laughing/ wrote:In short, Hall’s narration is oddly detached from the characters, setting, and action of the novel. There’s a good mystery in the heart of this book, but Hall does everything in his power to curb your enjoyment of it.

at 10 in the morning? your poor, victimized employer!

by Hellsangel Fri Oct 10, 2014 10:36 am

swapna wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:Here is another review:

http://chambertfour.com/2010/07/29/review-the-case-of-the-man-who-died-laughing/ wrote:In short, Hall’s narration is oddly detached from the characters, setting, and action of the novel. There’s a good mystery in the heart of this book, but Hall does everything in his power to curb your enjoyment of it.

at 10 in the morning? your poor, victimized employer!

It is not ten in the morning everywhere, Ammachi. It is 5 PM somewhere in the world.

PS: For your reference: Look this up.

by Impedimenta Fri Oct 10, 2014 10:43 am

swapna wrote:that was a splendid review. your criticism of the author's detachment from the scene he had set up is insightful, although I had not come across that in "the case of the deadly butter chicken."

the latter, with its cricket intrigue, has a complex plot.

I wish you'd write more reviews.

Not sure if you read this book but it hit me once facecream escapes from the godman's chambers, how detached the characters are from the setting. I loved Vish puri's personality. He reminded me of Poirot, not sure why. I wanted to add that to my review:-)

BTW, I ordered the Language instinct by Steven Pinker. My daughter was eyeing it. not sure if she will understand it. she is 12. Thanks for the reco.

by Impedimenta Fri Oct 10, 2014 10:45 am

Hellsangel wrote:
swapna wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:Here is another review:

http://chambertfour.com/2010/07/29/review-the-case-of-the-man-who-died-laughing/ wrote:In short, Hall’s narration is oddly detached from the characters, setting, and action of the novel. There’s a good mystery in the heart of this book, but Hall does everything in his power to curb your enjoyment of it.

at 10 in the morning? your poor, victimized employer!
It is not ten in the morning everywhere, Ammachi. It is 5 PM somewhere in the world.

PS: For your reference: Look this up.

Why don't you accuse me of plagiarism directly? Why through him?

by Guest Fri Oct 10, 2014 10:52 am

by Guest Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:04 am

Not sure what Tracy Whitney is doing on this thread. Earlier Tracy was whining about the fact that Impy has blocked her on the forum. If this is true Tracy should have taken the moral high ground and stopped responding to any of Impy's posts. The fact that she persists in responding to Impy's posts despite the fact that Impy has blocked her indicates that Tracy has no class.

by Guest Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:06 am

lol ... I can't post anything about diggy, is that it?

by Guest Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:07 am

Beatrix Kiddo wrote:lol ... I can't post anything about diggy, is that it?

No that's not it. My objection is to the fact that you keep responding to Impy's posts hoping against hope to elicit some response even though you yourself were earlier claiming that Impy has blocked you on the forum. Do you have no class?

by Guest Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:10 am

Rashmun wrote:
Beatrix Kiddo wrote:lol ... I can't post anything about diggy, is that it?

No that's not it. My objection is to the fact that you keep responding to Impy's posts hoping against hope to elicit some response even though you yourself were earlier claiming that Impy has blocked you on the forum. Do you have no class?

impy had posted once that she hasn't blocked me. so it's mostly a speculation on my part. otoh idefix actually made it public he has blocked you. you still kept on addressing and provoking him. you have no class, rashu?

by Guest Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:18 am

Beatrix Kiddo wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Beatrix Kiddo wrote:lol ... I can't post anything about diggy, is that it?

No that's not it. My objection is to the fact that you keep responding to Impy's posts hoping against hope to elicit some response even though you yourself were earlier claiming that Impy has blocked you on the forum. Do you have no class?

impy had posted once that she hasn't blocked me. so it's mostly a speculation on my part. otoh idefix actually made it public he has blocked you. you still kept on addressing and provoking him. you have no class, rashu?

PP blocked me after fighting with me for more than two years on this forum. So he has forfeited any expectation of classy behavior from me. The senior poster on this forum Seva has called PP a "Mudboy" for his penchant to throw mud at people he disagrees with meaning I was not the only person exasperated by PP's behavior.

Impy never posted that she has not blocked you--everyone knows by now that lying is second nature to you. In fact Impy has stopped responding to any of your posts. So you were correct when you claimed on this forum that Impy has blocked you on this forum.

by seven Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:28 am

Rashmun - You think it's possible she posted n you missed it ?

Stop dragging not participating posters into your fight. Both of you.

by Guest Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:29 am

seven wrote:Rashmun - You think it's possible she posted n you missed it ?

Stop dragging not participating posters into your fight. Both of you.

Not possible. I read all the posts of regulars on this forum.

by SomeProfile Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:36 am

Rashmunni getting into cat fights? Sounds like Rashmunni's sex change is making rapid progress.

by seven Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:37 am

Rashmun wrote:
seven wrote:Rashmun - You think it's possible she posted n you missed it ?

Stop dragging not participating posters into your fight. Both of you.

Not possible. I read all the posts of regulars on this forum.

Wow. I have a test for you. My speed was 450 wpm. Good for people who read a lot.
Try it testyourspritz.com

If that doesn't work try spritzinc.com
It's really awesome!

by Guest Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:40 am

SomeProfile wrote:Rashmunni getting into cat fights? Sounds like Rashmunni's sex change is making rapid progress.

Welcome to the thread Some Poopile. Looks like the surgery on your anus full of piles has resulted in you having fantasies and disorientation. Hope you get well soon.

by Guest Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:42 am

Rashmun wrote:
Beatrix Kiddo wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Beatrix Kiddo wrote:lol ... I can't post anything about diggy, is that it?

No that's not it. My objection is to the fact that you keep responding to Impy's posts hoping against hope to elicit some response even though you yourself were earlier claiming that Impy has blocked you on the forum. Do you have no class?

impy had posted once that she hasn't blocked me. so it's mostly a speculation on my part. otoh idefix actually made it public he has blocked you. you still kept on addressing and provoking him. you have no class, rashu?

PP blocked me after fighting with me for more than two years on this forum. So he has forfeited any expectation of classy behavior from me. The senior poster on this forum Seva has called PP a "Mudboy" for his penchant to throw mud at people he disagrees with meaning I was not the only person exasperated by PP's behavior.

Impy never posted that she has not blocked you--everyone knows by now that lying is second nature to you. In fact Impy has stopped responding to any of your posts. So you were correct when you claimed on this forum that Impy has blocked you on this forum.

she did too. I don't have time to google.

Regardless, is there a rule one can't post on threads of posters who don't respond to you? If I have a thought I can post on any thread I want. I can address that poster directly, or I can address others, or I can make a public announcement. That diggy image post could have been addressed to anyone on that thread.

You are either pissed that I posted diggy's image, or you want to distract readers from the original topic, the accusation that impy possibly lifted words from another review w/o giving due credit. So, which one is it?

by Guest Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:47 am

Beatrix Kiddo wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Beatrix Kiddo wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Beatrix Kiddo wrote:lol ... I can't post anything about diggy, is that it?

No that's not it. My objection is to the fact that you keep responding to Impy's posts hoping against hope to elicit some response even though you yourself were earlier claiming that Impy has blocked you on the forum. Do you have no class?

impy had posted once that she hasn't blocked me. so it's mostly a speculation on my part. otoh idefix actually made it public he has blocked you. you still kept on addressing and provoking him. you have no class, rashu?

PP blocked me after fighting with me for more than two years on this forum. So he has forfeited any expectation of classy behavior from me. The senior poster on this forum Seva has called PP a "Mudboy" for his penchant to throw mud at people he disagrees with meaning I was not the only person exasperated by PP's behavior.

Impy never posted that she has not blocked you--everyone knows by now that lying is second nature to you. In fact Impy has stopped responding to any of your posts. So you were correct when you claimed on this forum that Impy has blocked you on this forum.

she did too. I don't have time to google.

Regardless, is there a rule one can't post on threads of posters who don't respond to you? If I have a thought I can post on any thread I want. I can address that poster directly, or I can address others, or I can make a public announcement. That diggy image post could have been addressed to anyone on that thread.

You are either pissed that I posted diggy's image, or you want to distract readers from the original topic, that impy lifted words from another review w/o giving due credit. So, which one is it?

One can understand very well why you don't have time to google for a post which doesn't exist. Do you remember the last time Impy responded to any of your posts despite the fact that you keep responding to her posts? Why do you like to tell lies so often? Who will believe all the vicious rumor mongering you do about other posters behind their backs if you keep getting caught telling lies and more lies?

by Guest Fri Oct 10, 2014 12:19 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Beatrix Kiddo wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Beatrix Kiddo wrote:
Rashmun wrote:

No that's not it. My objection is to the fact that you keep responding to Impy's posts hoping against hope to elicit some response even though you yourself were earlier claiming that Impy has blocked you on the forum. Do you have no class?

impy had posted once that she hasn't blocked me. so it's mostly a speculation on my part. otoh idefix actually made it public he has blocked you. you still kept on addressing and provoking him. you have no class, rashu?

PP blocked me after fighting with me for more than two years on this forum. So he has forfeited any expectation of classy behavior from me. The senior poster on this forum Seva has called PP a "Mudboy" for his penchant to throw mud at people he disagrees with meaning I was not the only person exasperated by PP's behavior.

Impy never posted that she has not blocked you--everyone knows by now that lying is second nature to you. In fact Impy has stopped responding to any of your posts. So you were correct when you claimed on this forum that Impy has blocked you on this forum.

she did too. I don't have time to google.

Regardless, is there a rule one can't post on threads of posters who don't respond to you? If I have a thought I can post on any thread I want. I can address that poster directly, or I can address others, or I can make a public announcement. That diggy image post could have been addressed to anyone on that thread.

You are either pissed that I posted diggy's image, or you want to distract readers from the original topic, that impy lifted words from another review w/o giving due credit. So, which one is it?

One can understand very well why you don't have time to google for a post which doesn't exist. Do you remember the last time Impy responded to any of your posts despite the fact that you keep responding to her posts? Why do you like to tell lies so often? Who will believe all the vicious rumor mongering you do about other posters behind their backs if you keep getting caught telling lies and more lies?

I had posted "if someone can quote me so that impy could read my post, coz I think she has blocked me". And she had replied to that post w/o anyone quoting me => she had not blocked me. This was in 2013.

anyway, tell me why I can or can't reply to certain threads and who are you to tell me that?

by Guest Fri Oct 10, 2014 12:28 pm

Beatrix Kiddo wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Beatrix Kiddo wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Beatrix Kiddo wrote:

impy had posted once that she hasn't blocked me. so it's mostly a speculation on my part. otoh idefix actually made it public he has blocked you. you still kept on addressing and provoking him. you have no class, rashu?

PP blocked me after fighting with me for more than two years on this forum. So he has forfeited any expectation of classy behavior from me. The senior poster on this forum Seva has called PP a "Mudboy" for his penchant to throw mud at people he disagrees with meaning I was not the only person exasperated by PP's behavior.

Impy never posted that she has not blocked you--everyone knows by now that lying is second nature to you. In fact Impy has stopped responding to any of your posts. So you were correct when you claimed on this forum that Impy has blocked you on this forum.

she did too. I don't have time to google.

Regardless, is there a rule one can't post on threads of posters who don't respond to you? If I have a thought I can post on any thread I want. I can address that poster directly, or I can address others, or I can make a public announcement. That diggy image post could have been addressed to anyone on that thread.

You are either pissed that I posted diggy's image, or you want to distract readers from the original topic, that impy lifted words from another review w/o giving due credit. So, which one is it?

One can understand very well why you don't have time to google for a post which doesn't exist. Do you remember the last time Impy responded to any of your posts despite the fact that you keep responding to her posts? Why do you like to tell lies so often? Who will believe all the vicious rumor mongering you do about other posters behind their backs if you keep getting caught telling lies and more lies?

I had posted if someone can quote me so that impy could read my post, coz I thought she has blocked. And she had replied to that post w/o anyone quoting me => she had not blocked me. This was in 2013.

anyway, tell me why I can or can't reply to certain threads and who are you to tell me that?

Impy never replied to your post in which you claimed that you used to love Impy but then found that she has blocked you both on this forum and also on chaikaapi chat. Some days afterwards, realizing perhaps that your post could come back to haunt you some day, you in fact removed your own post in which you had claimed that Impy has blocked you.
You are welcome to respond to a post on any thread just as I have the freedom to say you have no class.

by Impedimenta Fri Oct 10, 2014 12:34 pm

:-( :-( big time. That.is.all. Crying or Very sad

by Guest Fri Oct 10, 2014 12:35 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Beatrix Kiddo wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Beatrix Kiddo wrote:
Rashmun wrote:

PP blocked me after fighting with me for more than two years on this forum. So he has forfeited any expectation of classy behavior from me. The senior poster on this forum Seva has called PP a "Mudboy" for his penchant to throw mud at people he disagrees with meaning I was not the only person exasperated by PP's behavior.

Impy never posted that she has not blocked you--everyone knows by now that lying is second nature to you. In fact Impy has stopped responding to any of your posts. So you were correct when you claimed on this forum that Impy has blocked you on this forum.

she did too. I don't have time to google.

Regardless, is there a rule one can't post on threads of posters who don't respond to you? If I have a thought I can post on any thread I want. I can address that poster directly, or I can address others, or I can make a public announcement. That diggy image post could have been addressed to anyone on that thread.

You are either pissed that I posted diggy's image, or you want to distract readers from the original topic, that impy lifted words from another review w/o giving due credit. So, which one is it?

One can understand very well why you don't have time to google for a post which doesn't exist. Do you remember the last time Impy responded to any of your posts despite the fact that you keep responding to her posts? Why do you like to tell lies so often? Who will believe all the vicious rumor mongering you do about other posters behind their backs if you keep getting caught telling lies and more lies?

I had posted if someone can quote me so that impy could read my post, coz I thought she has blocked. And she had replied to that post w/o anyone quoting me => she had not blocked me. This was in 2013.

anyway, tell me why I can or can't reply to certain threads and who are you to tell me that?

Impy never replied to your post in which you claimed that you used to love Impy but then found that she has blocked you both on this forum and also on chaikaapi chat. Some days afterwards, realizing perhaps that your post could come back to haunt you some day, you in fact removed your own post in which you had claimed that Impy has blocked you.
You are welcome to respond to a post on any thread just as I have the freedom to say you have no class.

And this was Impy's post to which you had responded ( with the claim that she has blocked you) and then subsequently removed your post:

https://such.forumotion.com/t21294-do-you-love-me#147121

This was in March 15 of this year. After this date I challenge you to show me any post of Impy where she has responded to you.

by Guest Fri Oct 10, 2014 12:40 pm

Rashmun wrote:Impy never replied to your post in which you claimed that you used to love Impy but then found that she has blocked you both on this forum and also on chaikaapi chat. Some days afterwards, realizing perhaps that your post could come back to haunt you some day, you in fact removed your own post in which you had claimed that Impy has blocked you.

haha no. I remember what I had said there. I had said that I used to love her but then someone told me how she copies posts from here on her public facebook and makes it look like they her own thoughts. She did that to M and max, if I remember correctly. Copied their comments on malasian airline crash, etc, sometimes verbatim. When that person told me about it, I checked her page myself, and saw she had also posted a couple of the links that I had posted here, sometime within one hour. Which proved to me she had not blocked me. So dunno what you mean by 'I found out...'. Anyway, since those were not my original links, I didn't care. All I told her was that I don't mind, but atleast say hi, etc sometimes.

Also note: I have divulged no name or FB link of impy here, like you had accused me last time. I had not done that that time either. I deleted that post a few days later, coz that time it was my habit to delete all my unanswered posts within a week or two.

Rashmun wrote:
You are welcome to respond to a post on any thread just as I have the freedom to say you have no class.

deal. *phew* I am glad we sorted this out.

by Guest Fri Oct 10, 2014 12:45 pm

Beatrix Kiddo wrote:
Rashmun wrote:Impy never replied to your post in which you claimed that you used to love Impy but then found that she has blocked you both on this forum and also on chaikaapi chat. Some days afterwards, realizing perhaps that your post could come back to haunt you some day, you in fact removed your own post in which you had claimed that Impy has blocked you.

haha no. I remember what I had said there. I had said that I used to love her but then someone told me how she copies posts from here on her public facebook and make it look like they her own thoughts. She did that to M and max, if I remember correctly. Copied their comments on malasian airline crash, etc, sometimes verbatim. When that person told me about it, I checked her page myself, and saw she had also posted a couple of the links that I had posted here, sometime within one hour. Which proved to me she had not blocked me. So dunno what you mean by 'I found out...'. Anyway, since those were not my original links, I didn't care. All I told her was that I don't mind, but atleast say hi, etc sometimes.

Also note: I have divulged no name or FB link of impy here, like you had accused me last time. I had not done that that time either. I deleted that post a few days later, coz that time it was my habit to delete all my unanswered posts within a week or two.

Rashmun wrote:
You are welcome to respond to a post on any thread just as I have the freedom to say you have no class.

deal. *phew* I am glad we sorted this out.

In that post you had made no mention of Impy's FB page at all. You had focussed on the fact that Impy has blocked you both on this forum and also on chaikaapi chat. Nice try to try and save your skin though.

Also I have never accused you of revealing Impy's name or facebook page. Looking forward to seeing you vomit more and more lies.

by Guest Fri Oct 10, 2014 12:45 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Beatrix Kiddo wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Beatrix Kiddo wrote:

she did too. I don't have time to google.

Regardless, is there a rule one can't post on threads of posters who don't respond to you? If I have a thought I can post on any thread I want. I can address that poster directly, or I can address others, or I can make a public announcement. That diggy image post could have been addressed to anyone on that thread.

You are either pissed that I posted diggy's image, or you want to distract readers from the original topic, that impy lifted words from another review w/o giving due credit. So, which one is it?

One can understand very well why you don't have time to google for a post which doesn't exist. Do you remember the last time Impy responded to any of your posts despite the fact that you keep responding to her posts? Why do you like to tell lies so often? Who will believe all the vicious rumor mongering you do about other posters behind their backs if you keep getting caught telling lies and more lies?

I had posted if someone can quote me so that impy could read my post, coz I thought she has blocked. And she had replied to that post w/o anyone quoting me => she had not blocked me. This was in 2013.

anyway, tell me why I can or can't reply to certain threads and who are you to tell me that?

Impy never replied to your post in which you claimed that you used to love Impy but then found that she has blocked you both on this forum and also on chaikaapi chat. Some days afterwards, realizing perhaps that your post could come back to haunt you some day, you in fact removed your own post in which you had claimed that Impy has blocked you.
You are welcome to respond to a post on any thread just as I have the freedom to say you have no class.

And this was Impy's post to which you had responded ( with the claim that she has blocked you) and then subsequently removed your post:

https://such.forumotion.com/t21294-do-you-love-me#147121

This was in March 15 of this year. After this date I challenge you to show me any post of Impy where she has responded to you.

oh she stopped responding to me sometime in early/middle 2013, which uncannily was the same time period two other posters also stopped responding to me directly. I sometimes used to wonder what was the relation between 3 different events. But I have stopped bothering about it now.

by Guest Fri Oct 10, 2014 12:52 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Beatrix Kiddo wrote:
Rashmun wrote:Impy never replied to your post in which you claimed that you used to love Impy but then found that she has blocked you both on this forum and also on chaikaapi chat. Some days afterwards, realizing perhaps that your post could come back to haunt you some day, you in fact removed your own post in which you had claimed that Impy has blocked you.

haha no. I remember what I had said there. I had said that I used to love her but then someone told me how she copies posts from here on her public facebook and make it look like they her own thoughts. She did that to M and max, if I remember correctly. Copied their comments on malasian airline crash, etc, sometimes verbatim. When that person told me about it, I checked her page myself, and saw she had also posted a couple of the links that I had posted here, sometime within one hour. Which proved to me she had not blocked me. So dunno what you mean by 'I found out...'. Anyway, since those were not my original links, I didn't care. All I told her was that I don't mind, but atleast say hi, etc sometimes.

Also note: I have divulged no name or FB link of impy here, like you had accused me last time. I had not done that that time either. I deleted that post a few days later, coz that time it was my habit to delete all my unanswered posts within a week or two.

Rashmun wrote:
You are welcome to respond to a post on any thread just as I have the freedom to say you have no class.

deal. *phew* I am glad we sorted this out.

In that post you had made no mention of Impy's FB page at all. You had focussed on the fact that Impy has blocked you both on this forum and also on chaikaapi chat. Nice try to try and save your skin though.

Also I have never accused you of revealing Impy's name or facebook page. Looking forward to seeing you vomit more and more lies.

https://such.forumotion.com/t21294-do-you-love-me#147121

In this thread I had posted what I wrote above (maybe I didn't mention FB back then to keep some mystery). In that post, I may have posted about her blocking me on the 2 sites, I don't remember. Maybe I accused why she pretends to block me when she copies the links I post on her FB. I really don't remember.

So, wait. You never accused me of revealing her fb info? I may be wrong. I do remember justifying it somewhere to someone, and I thought that was you. My bad, I apologize.

And yeah, since impy has posted 2 sad emoticons, I will stop talking about her like she doesn't exist. I apologize. I tend to become insensitive when I am trying to sort something out.

by MaxEntropy_Man Fri Oct 10, 2014 5:25 pm

impy the language instinct is a very enjoyable and absorbing read. the most unexpected thing pinker talks about is how the conversion from pidgin to creole takes place (or is it the other way round? i forget now). he speculates on how this could be the fundamental mechanism through which new languages were formed. basically children take a language their parents learned imperfectly (pidgin), add structure and grammar to it without aiming to do so, and lo and behold you have a new language (creole)! additional proof for this comes from a group of deaf and mute kids who learned sign language from their deaf and mute parents who learned it late in life, but ended up speaking it more perfectly than their parents, fixing their parents' errors. there's much more, but i don't want to rob the joy of discovery from you.

by Sponsored content

Vish Puri Series

Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series

Re: Vish Puri Series