CR No. 6513 of 2010 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. CR No. 6513 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 29.11.2010 Sukhbir Singh and others ....Petitioner Versus Babu Singh and others ....Respondents. Coram:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Singh 1.Whether reporters of local news papers may be allowed to see judgement ? 2. To be referred to reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? Present: Mr. Tejinder Pal Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.S. Bains, Advocate for the respondent – PSEB. ... Alok Singh, J.(Oral) Plaintiff – petitioner has filed present petition challenging the order dated 27.9.2010 passed by the Civil Judge, Jr. Division, Sunam, whereby application moved by the plaintiff – petitioner for impleading co- sharers as proforma defendants to avoid legal complications, was rejected. Plaintiff – petitioner wants to implead other co-sharers as proforma defendants in the suit saying they are the necessary and proper parties. CR No. 6513 of 2010 2 Initially, suit for permanent injunction was filed to the effect that defendant No.1 in collusion with defendants No.2 and 3, wants to alienate the electric motor connection in dispute, hence he may be restrained. Although, one of the co-owners can file suit for permanent prohibitory injunction, however, impleadment of the co-sharers as proforma defendants would not change the position and their impleadment will not give rise to any cause to the other defendants to raise objection about the non-maintainability of the suit for want of non-joinder of necessary parties under the provisions of Order 1 Rule 9 CPC. In the opinion of this Court, impleadment sought ought to have been allowed. Petition is allowed. Impleadment sought also stands allowed. ( Alok Singh ) Judge 29.11.2010 sk.