CR No.1989 of 2010 ::1:: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.1989 of 2010 Date of decision: 26.03.2010 Sangeeta Sharma .. Petitioner Versus J.S.Narula and another .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI a). Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? b). To be referred to the Reporters or not ? c). Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? Present:- Mr.Raj Mohan Singh, Advocate for the petitioner . . . AJAY TEWARI, J. (ORAL) This petition has been filed against the order of the learned Trial Court wherein an application for appointing Local Commissioner filed by the respondent-defendant has been allowed. The petitioner had filed the suit for injuncting the respondent from restricting the user from a staircase situated in the common building. The case of the respondent was that the staircase, which is claimed by the petitioner, was his exclusive staircase and that there was another common staircase which was being used by the petitioner and the other shopkeepers of the building. By consent of the parties, one Mr.J.S.Panchal, was appointed as Local Commissioner. He came and gave a report that the staircase in question were the exclusive staircase of the respondent and that the petitioner was also using them. He, however, did not give any finding regarding the existence of any other alleged common staircase. After considering the application filed by the respondent the Trial Court has CR No.1989 of 2010 ::2:: again directed the same Local Commissioner to submit a report about the existence or otherwise of the alleged common stairs. I find no material irregularity in the order of the learned Trial Court so as to render it liable for interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Consequently, this petition is dismissed. March 26, 2010 (AJAY TEWARI) Sukhpreet JUDGE