Civil Revision No. 1336 of 2009 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 1336 of 2009 Date of decision: 26.4.2010 Ram Krishan ...Petitioner Versus Jasmer Kaur and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D.ANAND. Present: Mr. Hardip Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. G.S.Ghuman, Advocate, for respondent No.4. Mr. Balbir Singh, Advocate, for respondent Nos.5 & 6 S.D.ANAND, J. In the context of the facts noticed in the order dated 26.11.2009 granted by a Coordinate Bench (Surya Kant, J.) of this Court, all the learned counsel states that they have no objection to the adoption of the course indicated in that order. Ordered accordingly. The amount of compensation, determined in reference No.41 by the learned District Judge, Patiala, would be retained in an FDR till the Regular Second Appeal (or whatever proceedings presently pending between the parties) are decided. It is apparent that all the parties are not common to both the cases. The other case, with which the present case proposed to be clubbed is mature for disposal; whereas the evidence of the Civil Revision No. 1336 of 2009 -2- **** petitioner-tenant is yet to be recorded in the present case. The finding in one case is not likely to affect the adjudication in the other case. In the light of foregoing discussion, I find myself in agreement with the learned District Judge, Patiala who observed that the proposal for clubbing appears to be aimed at delaying disposal of the case. Disposed of accordingly. April 26, 2010 (S.D.Anand) Pka Judge