IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.R. No. 413 of 2006. Date of Decision: 23rd April, 2009. Ram Mehar ....Petitioner through None Versus Jogi Ram & Anr. ...Respondents through None 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 27.10.2005 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Jind whereby the respondent-plaintiffs' appeal against the order dated 21.8.2004 of the learned Additional Civil Judge [Senior Division], Safidon has been accepted and their application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC has been allowed thereby restraining the petitioner from interfering in possession of the respondents over the land comprised in Khasra Nos. 25/1[3-6] and 25/1/2[0-3]. While admitting the revision petition, this Court vide order dated 23.1.2006 stayed operation of the impugned order passed by the learned first Appellate Court. In this manner, there is no interim injunction in favour of the respondent-plaintiffs. No one appears on behalf of the parties. The record reveals that the civil suit was filed in the year 2003. It is quite possible that the suit itself might have been decided. Be that as it may, there being no ad-interim injunction from last more than five years, I am of the considered view that no case to grant injunction, at this stage, is made out. The revision petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction that if the civil suit is still pending, the same shall be disposed of at the earliest and preferably within six months. Disposed of. April 23, 2009. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE