CR No.6356 of 2008 - 1 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CR No.6356 of 2008 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION: 18.11.2009 **** Raman Sharma . . . . Petitioner VS. Sundri Devi & others . . . . Respondents **** 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? **** Present: Mr.Rajesh Kumar Lamba, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Shiv Kumar, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3 **** SURYA KANT J.(ORAL) (1). This revision petition is directed by the defendant against whom ad interim injunction has been granted by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Faridabad vide impugned order dated 23.11.2006 and which has been further upheld by the learned Additional District Judge, Faridabad vide the impugned judgement dated 02.08.2008. (2). The controversy is nothing but the sad saga as how the greed has spoiled the most pious relationship of brother and sister and other family members, who are fighting over their respective shares in a plot/house measuring 300 sq.yard situated within the Revenue estate of Mauza Dabua, Tehsil Ballabhgarh, District Faridabad. The petitioner-defendant, in order to claim CR No.6356 of 2008 - 2 - exclusive ownership qua half of the property, relies upon a Sale-Deed purportedly executed on 21.08.1990 by his mother in his favour in respect of half of the plot measuring 150 sq.yards. (3). Both the Courts, after a careful consideration of the material on record, have observed that the property appears to be jointly owned by the parties and consequently a restraint order from dispossessing the plaintiff No.1 from the suit property or its further alienation has been passed. (4). No interference with the impugned orders dated 23.11.2006 and 02.08.2008 is, therefore, called for by this Court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction. (5). Dismissed. (SURYA KANT) JUDGE 18.11.2009 vishal shonkar