C.R.No.8093 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R.No.8093 of 2011 Date of decision:30.10.2013 Satpal and others ....Petitioners Versus Uma Rani and others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG 1. Whether reporters of local newspapers may be allowed to see judgment? 2. To be referred to reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present:- Mr. Amit Jain, Advocate for the petitioners. RAKESH KUMAR GARG, J (ORAL) The petitioners have filed the instant petition for quashing of the order dated 27.10.2007 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bathinda and the order dated 01.09.2011 passed by the Additional District Judge Bathinda, whereby, application filed on behalf of the petitioners to proceed against the respondents under Order 39 Rule 2-A CPC has been dismissed. In the aforesaid application, the petitioners have alleged that respondents have committed contempt of the Court by violating the interim order dated 16.07.2002 whereby parties were directed to maintain status quo. It is the allegation of the petitioners that after passing of the aforesaid order dated 16.7.2002, the respondents have raised Kadian Savita 2013.10.31 15:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh C.R.No.8093 of 2011 2 construction over the property in dispute and thus, in the aforesaid manner, they have violated the interim order. However, it is a matter of record that on 16.7.2002, the Court had passed the order directing the parties only to the extent of maintaining status quo with regard to alienation of the suit property and admittedly, no order was passed with regard to maintaining status quo with regard to raising construction. As per the facts, the petitioners had already alienated the suit land prior to the passing of the interim order. Even otherwise, main suit was dismissed by the trial Court and appeal filed by the petitioners against the aforesaid judgment and decree of the Civil Court was also dismissed. In view thereof, I find no merit in this petition. Dismissed. October 30, 2013 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) savita JUDGE Kadian Savita 2013.10.31 15:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh