IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Revision 4183 of 2007. Date of Decision: 5th February, 2008... Mohinder Singh ....Petitioner through Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate Versus Balbir Singh ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT. 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? SURYA KANT,J.(ORAL) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 4.10.2006 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana whereby an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure moved by the petitioner has been dismissed, as well as against the order dated 28th April, 2007 passed by learned Additional District Judge (Adhoc) Fast Track Court, Ludhiana, affirming the afore-mentioned order. The petitioner has filed a suit for permanent injunction alleging, inter-alia, that he is joint owner in possession of the land measuring 67 kanals 2 marlas situated within the revenue estate of village Bulara, Tehsil & District Ludhiana. It is, however, stated by him in the plaint that a suit for specific performance filed by the father Civil Revision No. 4183 of 2007. ::-2-:: of the respondent was decreed and the petitioner was directed to execute the sale deed for land measuring six kanals. The petitioner, however, has claimed in the present suit that only symbolical possession was delivered in execution of the said decree, therefore, unless the joint property is partitioned, the petitioner can not be dispossessed from the specific khasra numbers, allegedly in his possession. Both the courts, on the basis of material on record have, prima facie, found otherwise. No case for interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is, thus, made out. Dismissed. February 05, 2008. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE