IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 1637 of 2010 Date of Decision: 28.10.2010 Jiwan Sharma .... Petitioner Versus Budh Ram ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present : Mr. S.S. Salar, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. B.P.S. Virk, Advocate for the respondent 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? ALOK SINGH, J. (ORAL) Learned counsel for the petitioner states that respondent has violated the interim injunction order for which an application under Order 39 Rule 2-A CPC was moved. He states that after moving an application under Order 39 Rule 2-A suit filed by the plaintiff-petitioner was also decreed vide judgment and decree dated 23.9.2009. In view of the final judgment in the suit, application under Order 39 Rule 2-A can not be proceeded, since object of Order 39 Rule 2-A CPC is to ensure compliance of interim order. In view of the decree being passed in favour of the petitioner/plaintiff, the only remedy available with the petitioner- plaintiff is to file regular execution complaining the violation of the decree and if such execution is filed that shall be decided at its own merits without being prejudiced from any observation made in the C.R. No. 1637 of 2010 2 impugned order. Present petition stands disposed of. (ALOK SINGH) 28.10.2010 JUDGE reena