Civil Revision No.1446 of 2010(O & M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.1446 of 2010(O & M) Date of Decision:27.07.2010 Bharat Bhushan & Ors. .... petitioners Versus Kashmir Singh & Ors. .....respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr.Rajesh Lamba,Advocate for the petitioners **** RAKESH KUMAR GARG J.(ORAL): At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners had filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC raising the points of insufficiency of court fee and the applicability of principles of res judicata against the plaintiffs-respondents and vide impugned order, the trial Court has decided only the question with regard to the affixation of court fee, against which, petitioners have no grievance but the trial Court has failed to decide the question of res judicata. I have perused the impugned order. No such argument on the ground of applicability of principles of res judicata, was raised. There is no such averment in the petition that the aforesaid plea of res judicata was raised and the same has not been dealt with by the trial Court. Civil Revision No.1446 of 2010(O & M) 2 Faced with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioners wishes to withdraw the present petition with liberty to avail any other remedy available to the petitioners by approaching the trial Court, in this regard. Ordered accordingly. (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) JUDGE 27.07.2010 neenu