C.R.No.5821 of 2003 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R.No.5821 of 2003 (O&M) Date of Decision: 25.08.2009 Randhir Singh .....Petitioner Versus The Gram Panchayat Kalkha and others ....Respondents Present: Mr. Ashish Gupta, Advocate for Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. None for the respondents. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ?No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?No -.- K. KANNAN J.(ORAL) 1. The revision is against the order of the Additional District Judge, Panipat dismissing the appeal filed against the order of the trial Court rejecting an application for interim injunction. The revision petitioner has at the stage of admission of the civil revision canvassed for a position that even the Appellate Court, while disposing of the appeal, had made reference to the plaintiff's possession of the property and therefore, the possession shall be preserved. In my view, the issue has to be considered from the stand-point of whether there had been a prima facie case in favour of the plaintiff. The Court found that the revenue entries in relation to the property showed that the property belonged to the Gram Panchayat and that the plaintiff had not established his prima facie case, especially when the Panchayat was C.R.No.5821 of 2003 (O&M) -2- complaining that there had been an illegal engagement. It shall not be possible to take a different view from how the trial Court or the Appellate Court have considered at the interlocutory stage and there is no error or illegality in the orders passed by the Courts below to obtain a fresh look at the whole matter. 2. The revision petition is devoid of merit and it is dismissed accordingly. No costs. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE August 25, 2009 Pankaj*