IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.4518 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision : 18.12.2009 Rajinder Singh .....Petitioner versus Nirmala Devi and another .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.N.K.Singla, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Amit Rishi, Advocate, for Mr.G.S.Anand, Advocate, for respondent No.2. -.- 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? --- ORDER Surya Kant, J. (Oral) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 20.9.2008 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Patiala, whereby it is observed that on account of failure of the petitioner-plaintiff to produce the original sale deed, adverse inference shall be drawn against him. From the nature of the suit the petitioner appears to have claimed himself to be a bonafide purchaser of the house in dispute, whereas the case of respondent No.2-bank is that there is already a charge on the said property as the previous owner, namely, defendant No.1- Nirmala Devi had deposited the original title deed with the bank in C.R. No.4518 of 2009 (O&M) 2 January, 2005. Counsel for the petitioner-plaintiff submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to produce the original title deed while leading his evidence as the original of the same has been deposited by him in the State Bank of Patiala and he would summon an official of the bank alongwith the original title deed. In this view of the matter, the revision petition is disposed of with a clarification that in case the petitioner produces the original title deed(s), the trial Court shall consider the issue involved on merits and in accordance with law before arriving at the conclusion as to whether or not adverse inference be drawn against the plaintiff. Disposed of. Dasti. 18-12-2009 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE