Civil Revision No. 3579 of 2010(O &M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 3579 of 2010(O &M) Date of Decision: May 25 , 2010 Omesh Goel and others ...... Petitioners Versus Shiv Kanwar Singh Sandhu ...... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Tewari Present: Mr.Chetan Mittral, Senior Advocate with Mr.Vishal Garg, Advocate for the petitioners. **** 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? Ajay Tewari, J. This petition has been filed against order of the learned Appellate Court rejecting an application filed by the petitioner-decree holder praying that an appeal filed by the respondent be dismissed summarily on the ground of maintainability. The learned Appellate Court prima facie found the appeal to be maintainable (holding that the question of the respondent being transferee pendente lite was yet to be decided). Learned Senior Advocate has argued that once the learned Appellate Court has itself found that the question of the respondent being transferee pendente lite has not yet been decided then he could not have held that the appeal was maintainable. After arguing for some time learned Senior Advocate has stated Civil Revision No. 3579 of 2010(O &M) 2 that the petitioner would be satisfied if he is permitted to withdraw the application altogether so that the question regarding maintainability of the appeal can be decided after a finding on the question of the respondent being transferee pendente lite is decided. The Appellate Court has noticed that the question of the respondent being transferee pendente lite is yet to be decided and a decision of that question would affect the maintainability of the appeal. Once it is so it cannot be held that the finding regarding maintainability is a final finding. This is at best a prima facie finding of the Appellate Court. Learned counsel also informs me that the main appeal is now fixed for arguments. In my opinion the interest of justice would be served if it is clarified that the finding regarding maintainability of the appeal is a prima facie finding subject to the applicability of Order 21 Rule 102 CPC. With this clarification this petition is disposed of. Since the main case has been decided, the pending Civil Misc. Applications, if any, stand disposed of. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE May 25, 2010 sunita