-1- Civil Revision No.1088 of 2011 (O&M). IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ... Date of Decision: February 21, 2011. Civil Revision No.1088 of 2011 (O&M). Mahender and others ... Petitioners. VERSUS Parsadi and others ... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL. 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. Lokesh Sinhal, Advocate, for the petitioners. -.- MOHINDER PAL, J. Defendants-petitioners are aggrieved against the order passed by the trial Court whereby their prayer for dismissal of the suit filed by the plaintiffs-respondents for redemption with consequential relief of permanent injunction in respect of the suit land as infructuous was declined. -2- Civil Revision No.1088 of 2011 (O&M). After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners and perusing the impugned order, I do not see any reason warranting interference in the impugned order passed by the learned trial Judge. Land in dispute was acquired by the Haryana Government during the pendency of the suit and the defendants made an application for dismissal of the suit as infructuous on the ground that the only question which now remains is with regard to compensation and that is to be determined by the Land Acquisition Collector. No doubt the question regarding compensation is to be determined by the Land Acquisition Collector, but compensation has to be paid by the concerned authorities on the basis of title to the suit land and question of title can only be decided by the Civil Court. The trial Court was, thus, justified in declining the prayer of the defendants-petitioners for dismissal of the suit filed by the plaintiffs-respondents as infructuous. Dismissed. ( MOHINDER PAL ) February 21, 2011. JUDGE ak