IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.4441 of 2004 Date of Decision:- 25.1.2008 Rameshwar Dass Sharma ....Petitioner(s) through Mr.Hari Om Sharma, Advocate vs. Parshotam Dass and another ....Respondent(s) through Mr.O.P.Gupta, Advocates. *** CORAM:-HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. *** 1) Whether Reporters of the 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 29.7.2004 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division)-cum- Executing Court, Panchkula whereby an application moved by the petitioner under Order 21 Rule 32 CPC has been dismissed. The petitioner had filed a civil suit for permanent injunction which was decreed by the Civil Court vide judgment and decree dated 20.11.1995. Alleging, inter alia, that after passing of the said decree, the respondents have encroached upon the petitioner's land, the present application was filed. An issue as to whether the respondent/judgment debtor has encroached upon the land of the decree-holder, was framed by the learned Civil Court which has since been answered against the petitioner. Hence this revision petition. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the C.R. No.4441 of 2004 -2- material on record. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the parties have taken a fair stand that the controversy regarding the alleged encroachment, if any, can be effectively resolved after getting the disputed land re-demarcated from a Revenue Officer. Consequently and for the reasons afore-stated, the impugned order dated 29.7.2004 is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division)-cum-Executing Court, Panchkula with a direction that some senior Revenue Officer may be appointed as Local Commissioner, who shall re-demarcate the disputed land, after sending advance notice to both the parties. The petitioner's application shall thereafter be decided afresh. However, both the parties shall be given an opportunity to raise their objections, if any, against the report of the Local Commissioner and upon consideration thereof that the issue pertaining to the alleged encroachment shall be decided. Disposed of. January 25, 2008 ( SURYA KANT ) poonam JUDGE