Civil Revision No.1913 of 2011 (O & M ) IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: March 18 , 2011. Civil Revision No.1913 of 2011 (O & M ) Jasmat and another ..Petitioners Versus Patap and others ..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL. 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: Mr.Yogesh Chaudhary, Advocate, for the petitioners. -.- MOHINDER PAL, J. Defendants-petitioners are aggrieved against the order dated 7.3.2011 passed by the trial Court whereby application filed by the petitioners for transposing them as plaintiffs in a suit filed by plaintiff-respondent Patap for declaration with consequential relief of possession of the property in dispute has been dismissed. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and going through the records of the case, I do not see any ground which may warrant interference by this Court in the impugned order passed by the trial Court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction. The instant suit was filed by the plaintiff-respondent on 3.8.2004. The petitioners did Civil Revision No.1913 of 2011 (O & M ) not think of transposing them as plaintiffs for about seven years and filed the application under Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure making such a prayer when the suit was almost at its final stage and only some documents remained to be tendered in evidenced by the defendants. Apparently, the said application was filed by the petitioners - defendants for transposing them as plaintiffs just to delay the decision in the suit. The trial Court was justified in declining the said prayer of the petitioners. Dismissed. Dated: March 18 ,2011. (MOHINDER PAL) ak JUDGE