IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.736 of 2008 Date of decision: February 6, 2008. Jagroop Singh ...Petitioner(s) v. Rashwinder Singh @ Jasminder Singh & Ors. ...Respondent(s) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT 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. Present: Shri Arvind Kashyap, Advocate for the petitioner. ORDER Surya Kant, J. - This Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 15.11.2006 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Fatehgarh Sahib whereby an application under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 CPC moved by the petitioner in his suit for permanent injunction, has been dismissed, as well as against the order dated 3.11.2007 passed by the learned District judge, Fatehgarh Sahib upholding the aforementioned order. There appears to be hardly any dispute that the petitioner and the respondent – defendants are co-sharers. Relying upon the recitals in the two sale deeds, by virtue of which the petitioner purchased part of the joint land, it is his contention that he is in exclusive possession of the disputed Khasra numbers. Concededly, the defendants are not party to those sale transactions. In these circumstances when there appears to be a joint holding, the courts below have rightly observed, of course prima-facie, that the petitioner cannot seek injunction against his co-sharers. While declining ad-interim injunction to the petitioner, the courts below have also observed that the petitioner has not been able to establish his exclusive possession over the khasra numbers in dispute as the revenue record does not support his contention. Needless to say that these are only prima-facie observations and shall have no bearing on the merits of the suit. With these observations, disposed of. February 6, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge