IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 8010 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: December 09, 2010 Vishal Jain. …Petitioner Versus Rani Atma 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. Sunil Chadha, Advocate. for the petitioner. Alok Singh, J. (Oral) Tenant-petitioner is assailing the order dated 09.11.2010 passed by the learned Rent Controller, Ludhiana, thereby allowing the amendment application moved by the landlady-respondent to correct the boundaries of the property in question in the eviction petition. The brief facts of the present case are that landlady- respondent has filed petition for eviction against the tenant- petitioner under Section 13-B of the East Punjab Urban Rent C.R. No.8010 of 2010 Restrictions Act, 1949. In the eviction petition, property in question is described as building No. B-XIX-214, Rani Jhansi Road, Civil Lines, Ludhiana. Tenant-petitioner is not disputing the identity of the property. Landlady-respondent by way of proposed amendment wanted to correct the boundaries of the property saying property owned and occupied by Sh. Piyush Kant Jain has been wrongly mentioned on the West, while property occupied and owned by Sh. Piyush Kant Jain is on the South side of the disputed property. Learned Rent Controller vide impugned order has permitted the landlady- respondent to correct the boundaries to the above effect. In the opinion of this Court, if identity of the tenanted property is not in dispute, then by correcting the boundaries of that property would not amount the change of the disputed property. To avoid confusion during the execution, learned Rent Controller has rightly permitted the landlady-respondent to correct the boundaries of the property in dispute. No interference is called for. Dismissed. December 09, 2010 ( Alok Singh ) vkd Judge 2