IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.572 of 2008 Date of decision:20.03.2009 Balbir Kumar and another ...Petitioners versus Parshotam Kumar and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: None. 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 ? K.Kannan, J.(Oral) 1. By my order dated 27.02.2009, the case was adjourned for today as a last chance and was directed to be shown in the urgent list for final disposal. In the case where a third party seeking for impleadment of a rent control proceeding, the petition was dismissed. There is no representation when the matter is called. 2. The Court below had considered the fact that earlier one Bhagwant Kishore, claiming himself to be the legal heir of Harbans Lal, moved an application for impleadment as a party and that application was also dismissed on 11.10.2006. It was found that the Rent Controller need not go into the issue of title and a person who is competent to receive the rent was entitled to maintain the petition for eviction. The Court below had passed an order on due consideration of all the relevant facts and accordingly I dismiss the civil revision on the perusal of the records although in the absence of the parties. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 20.03.2009 sanjeev