IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.3785 of 2006 (O&M) Date of Decision: 21.10.2009 Ram Piari etc. .....Petitioners Versus Union of India ...Respondent Present: None for the parties. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 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? -.- K. KANNAN J.(ORAL) 1. The civil revision is against the order of the Executing Court directing that the subsequent interest shall be charged only on the principal amount from the date of the award dated 31.12.1992 when a second reference was made and not from the year 1986 when on a previous reference an award passed by the Arbitrator rejecting the reference. The first award had been set aside on the ground that the Arbitrator had misconducted himself in not delivering the award within a period of four months from the date of reference. The Executing Court considered the fact that the interest could be awarded only from the date when a subsequent reference was made and when the award was passed. 2. On the day when the case is posted, there is no representation on either side. The civil revision petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE October 21, 2009 Pankaj*