C.M. No.7992-C of 2007 and -1- RSA No.1319 of 2003 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.M. No.7992-C of 2007 and RSA No.1319 of 2003 Date of Decision: 03.08.2009 Ajmer Singh and others ...Applicants-Appellants VERSUS Hakam Deen and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI Present: Mr. Amarjit Markan, Advocate for the applicants/appellants. Mr. P. K. Ganga, Advocate for respondent No.1. *** AJAY TEWARI J. (ORAL) On 22nd April, 2008 the following order was passed by this Court:- “Present:- Mr. Amarjit Markan, Advocate for the appellants. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the courts below have arrived at a conclusion that on given facts, the suit was not maintainable and the right of a stranger has to be decided by the executing court after giving opportunity of hearing to the said stranger under Rules 97 to 99 of Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure. He has relied C.M. No.7992-C of 2007 and -2- RSA No.1319 of 2003 upon a judgment of the Apex Court in 'N.S.S. Narayana Sarma and others v. M/s Goldstone Exports (P) Ltd. and others' AIR 2002 Supreme Court 252. Learned counsel has further submitted that he has filed application bearing Civil Misc. No.7992-C of 2007 under Order 23 Rule 1 Sub Rule 3 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for withdrawal of suit No.649 of 1992. He has further submitted that the plaintiff is not seeking permission to file a fresh suit and by relying upon the judgment of this Court in 'Satish Bhardwaj v. Dhani Ram' 1998(2) PLR 73 stated that the said permission be granted to the plaintiff-appellants. Notice of the civil misc. application to the respondents for 18.7.2008.” Learned counsel for respondent No.1 states that the appellants would be permitted to perpetuate the litigation because they would file yet another suit. On this, learned counsel for the applicants stated that he is not seeking any permission to withdraw the said suit with a liberty to file afresh on the same cause of action but merely to withdraw the present suit. In this view of the matter, the apprehension of the learned counsel for respondent No.1 is not well maintained. Consequently, the civil misc. application no.7992-C of 2007 is allowed and the applicants are permitted to withdraw the suit filed by them without any permission to file afresh on the same cause of action. C.M. No.7992-C of 2007 and -3- RSA No.1319 of 2003 Accordingly, this appeal stands disposed of. As the main case has been disposed of therefore all the pending civil miscellaneous applications in the case also stand disposed of. ( AJAY TEWARI ) August 03, 2009 JUDGE ashish