C.R. No. 4867 of 2009 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.R. No. 4867 of 2009 Date of Decision: August 27, 2009 Rajinder Parsad …..Petitioner Vs. Moti Lal and others …..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Mr. S.S. Khurana, Advocate for the petitioners. -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) Courts below have dismissed the application for interim injunction filed by the plaintiff- petitioner on the ground that he does not have prima facie a strong case and balance of convenience does not lie in his favour and that he would not suffer any irreparable loss. Counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner has filed suit for possession by means of partition on the basis of his 1/3rd share in House No.6926A whereas the trial Court on the basis of the record of the C.R. No. 4867 of 2009 [2] Municipal Committee wrongly observed that the property in possession of defendant is 6926. It has also been informed that four PWs have already been examined by the plaintiff- petitioner. Taking into consideration the fact that the boundaries and the actual property is required to be ascertained in the case on the basis of the evidence of the parties, no ground is made out for interference in the order passed by the trial Court. However, in the interest of justice, it is ordered that the trial will be concluded preferably within a period of one year after the next date of hearing fixed before the trial Court. Dismissed. August 27, 2009 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE