C.W.P No. 11694 of 2007 ::1:: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P No. 11694 of 2007 Date of decision : August 02, 2007 Narinder Singh, ......Petitioner. through Mr. A.K.Kalsy, Advocate v. Punjab State Electricity Board & others, ......Respondents. CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. SATHASIVAM HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA *** 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers 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 ? *** RAJIVE BHALLA,J The petitioner prays for the issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the award, dated 3.5.2007, passed by the permanent Lok Adalat, Ludhiana. We have heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the paper book. The dispute herein arises from an award, passed by the permanent Lok Adalat, upholding the act of the Electricity Board in fixing respondent No.3's electricity meter, on a common wall. We are not inclined to interfere with the award, passed by respondent No.4, as it does not suffer from any error of law. Even otherwise, at no stage of the proceedings, did the petitioner raise a plea C.W.P No. 11694 of 2007 ::2:: that the Lok Adalat should not decide the dispute on merits, as it would entail adjudication of intricate disputes. Infact, the petitioner, as recorded in the impugned award, accepted the appointment of a local Commissioner, whose report led to the passing of the impugned award. We find no ground to interfere with the award, passed by respondent No.4, upholding the act of the electricity Authorities in fixing an electricity meter on a wall, which the petitioner claims is owned by him. We are, however, inclined to accept the prayer, made by counsel for the petitioner, that adjudication of the question of title with respect to the status of the wall would not be binding upon the parties. In view of what has been noticed herein above, the present petition is dismissed. It is, however, clarified that the findings on the question of title, recorded by respondent No.4, shall not bind the parties in any other proceedings that may be initiated or defended by them. ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) JUDGE ( P. SATHASIVAM ) JUDGE August 02, 2007. 'kk'