IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.4821 of 2009 Decided on : 26.08.2009 Sh. Ravi Dass Sabha ... Petitioner versus Avinash Chander & others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI Present : Mr. Ashish Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Arun Jindal, Advocate for respondents. 1.Whether Reporters of local newspapers 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. (ORAL) This revision petition has been filed against the concurrent orders of the Courts below declining temporary injunction to the petitioner for protecting it against the illegal dispossession by the respondents. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length. In my opinion, both the Courts below have rightly considered the fact that the petitioner was claiming tenancy under the earlier owner but no independent documentary proof thereof was placed on record. Both the Courts below have also rightly held that in regard to the claim of tenancy of the petitioner for the last 54 years, the House Tax Assessment Register entries for ¾ years could not be considered as a proof of the tenancy of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the CR No.4821 of 2009 -2- petitioner has not been able to persuade me that these findings are corroded by such material irregularity so as to justify interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Consequently this petition is dismissed. August 26, 2009 (AJAY TEWARI) sonia JUDGE