IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 5643 of 2010 Date of Decision: November 15, 2010 Rajbir and others. …Petitioners Versus Manik Ram and others … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH 1. Whether reporters of local news papers may be Allowed to see judgment? 2. To be referred to reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr. Arvind Singh, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Rameshwar Malik, Advocate, for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Alok Singh, J. (Oral) Plaintiffs-petitioners have filed suit for declaration saying sale deed executed by their father qua the share of the plaintiffs is void. In the suit, learned Trial Court has directed the plaintiffs-petitioners to pay ad valorem court fee. Hon’ble Apex Court in the matter of Suhrid Singh @ Sardool Singh Vs. Randhir Singh and others, reported in 2010(2) RCR (Civil) 564, has held that if plaintiff is not the executant and declaration is sought that alienation made by the father qua C.R.No. 5643 of 2010 the share of the plaintiff is void, then plaintiff is not supposed to pay ad valorem court fee. In view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the matter of Suhrid Singh (supra), present petition is allowed. Impugned order is set aside. However, it is made clear that any observation made in the impugned order while refusing the injunction shall not affect the trial. November 15, 2010 (Alok Singh) vkd Judge 2