IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Civil Review No. 3 of 2010. Date of Decision: 24.7.2010. _______________________________________________ Mathura Devi. ….Petitioner. Versus. Shyam Lal. ….Respondent. Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, Judge. Whether approved for reporting1?. For the petitioner : Mr.V.D.Khidtta, Advocate. For Respondent. : Mr. G.D.Verma, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Romesh Verma, Advocate. Dev Darshan Sud, J.(Oral). The petitioner has preferred this review petition against the judgment of this Court passed in FAO(HMA) No. 128 of 2006, whereby the appeal preferred by petitioner- Shyam Lal was allowed and decree of divorce granted. A number of grounds have been urged by the petitioner to support its contention that this Court has erred while delivering judgment in the appeal. The ground taken is that “the judgment passed by this Hon’ble Court on 30.10.2009 is totally wrong and hence, deserves to be reviewed in the interest of justice and fair play”. I wonder whether this ground can be allowed to be urged in review Whether reporters of the Local papers are allowed to see the judgmentyes. 2 where the idiosyncrasy of a frustrated litigant can be made the ground under Order 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Thereafter, the ground urged are references to the evidence of each and every witness which has been considered in the appeal. In other words the appellant wants to re-agitate all the points which have been considered in the judgment. There is no merit in this review petition which is accordingly dismissed. (Dev Darshan Sud), Judge. July 24,2010 (R)