Civil Revision No.4829 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.4829 of 2010 Date of decision: 30.11.2010 Krishan Lal and another ....Petitioners Versus Madan Lal and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present: - Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate, for Mr. N.C. Kinra, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Deepal Balyan, Advocate, for respondent No.6. 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? ***** ALOK SINGH, J (ORAL) Present petition is filed challenging the order dated 31.5.2010 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Rohtak, and order dated 15.6.2010 passed by Additional District Judge, Rohtak, thereby rejecting the application moved by the plaintiffs seeking ad interim injunction under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC. Learned counsel appearing for the parties fairly stated that present petition be disposed of with their consent in the following terms: “1. Parties shall maintain status quo during the pendency of the suit qua possession and nature of the property. No third party interest shall be created by either of the party to the suit during the pendency of the suit. 2. None of the party shall seek unnecessary Civil Revision No.4829 of 2010 -2- adjournment from the Court. 3. Learned trial Court be requested to decide the case finally in accordance with law preferably within two years from today.” With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, present petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. (Alok Singh) Judge November 30, 2010 R.S.