Civil Revision No. 4440 of 2009(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 4440 of 2009(O&M) Date of Decision: February 26 , 2010 Bane Singh ...... Petitioner Versus Piyush colonisers Ltd. and others ...... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Tewari Present: Mr.Vikram Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Suman Jain, Advocate for respondents No. 1 to 3. Mr.K.C.Bhatia, Addl.A.G. Haryana. **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Ajay Tewari, J. This revision has been filed against the order whereby application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC filed by respondents No. 4 to 6 has been allowed and they have been deleted from the array of parties. The allegation in the suit was that respondents No. 1 to 3 had fraudulently got the sale deed executed from the petitioners of a part of the suit land but the consideration therefor was not paid and thus the sale deed had become inoperative; a prayer was also made to respondents No. 4 to 6 for restraining them from disposing the application of respondents No.1 to Civil Revision No. 4440 of 2009(O&M) 2 3 for letter of intent. Learned court has noticed that the LOI issued does not cover the land of the petitioners. Once it has come out that the letter of intent has not been issued for the land of the petitioners and further, learned counsel for respondents No. 1 to 3 has stated that they will not seek any letter of intent for the property in dispute till the disposal of the suit, no fault can be found with the order deleting respondents No. 4 to 6 from the array of parties. Consequently with this clarification this revision petition is disposed of. Since the main case has been decided, the pending Civil Misc. Applications, if any, stand disposed of. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE February 26, 2010 sunita