IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 5365 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: August 25, 2010 Jarnail Singh. …Petitioner Versus Gurdayal Singh and others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH. 1. Whether reporters of local news papers may be Allowed to see judgment? 2. To be referred to reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr. Amit Kumar Jain, Advocate, for the petitioner. Alok Singh, J. (Oral) Present petition is filed challenging the order dated 06.08.2010 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Safidon, whereby the learned Trial Court has allowed defendants No. 2 and 3 to cross-examine defendant No.1. The brief facts of the present case are that defendants No. 2 and 3 are purchaser from defendant No.1. During the pendency of the suit filed by the plaintiff-petitioner C.R. No.5365 of 2010 for specific performance, defendant No.1 now wants to settle this dispute with the plaintiff and has agreed to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff pursuant to the alleged agreement to sell. Defendants No. 2 and 3, who are purchaser from defendant No.1, have every right to cross-examine defendant no.1 since interest of defendant no.1 and interest of defendant nos. 2 and 3, who are purchaser from defendant no.1, are against each other. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that plaintiff shall also be entitled to cross- examine defendant No.1, however, learned trial Court has not permitted the plaintiff to cross-examine defendant no.1. I do not find any observation, from the impugned order, that plaintiff is not permitted to cross-examine defendant no.1. Plaintiff has every right to cross-examine all the witnesses produced by the defendants’ side. In view of the above, I find no illegality in the impugned order. Petition is dismissed with the above observation. August 25, 2010 ( Alok Singh ) vkd Judge 2