C.R. No.3484 of 2010 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. C.R. No.3484 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 30.06.2010 Baldev Krishan ....Petitioner Versus Chandershekhar and another ....Respondents. Coram:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Singh 1.Whether reporters of local news papers may be allowed to see judgement ? 2. To be referred to reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? Present: Mr. ADS Jatana, Advocate for the petitioner. ... Alok Singh, J. (Oral) Present petition is filed assailing order dated 9.4.2010 whereby application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC was allowed by the trial Court impleading respondent No.1 as one of the defendants. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the trial Court while deciding the application for impleadment has observed that the applicant is having direct interest in the property and that is not the correct position, hence the petitioner is aggrieved from the order. It is settled position of law that any observation made while allowing the impleadment application, does not mean that the applicant has C.R. No.3484 of 2010 2 any right in the property in dispute. These observations are prime-facie observations which cannot come into the way of the Court while deciding the suit on merits. It is yet to be decided as to whether respondent No.1 herein (newly impleaded defendant) has any right in the property in dispute. While allowing the application of the applicant, the Court has committed no illegality or jurisdictional error. Any person claiming right over the property in dispute, if prima-facie shows his right, he becomes necessary/proper party and must be given an opportunity to be heard and to establish his right. In view of the above, the petition is devoid of merits and hence is dismissed. ( Alok Singh ) Judge 30.06.2010 sk.