IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.3124 of 2008 Date of Decision:- 28.05.2008 Bachhittar Singh ....Petitioner(s) through Mr.R.S.Athwal, Advocate. vs. Hari Singh ....Respondent(s) through Mr.Vikas Bahl, Advocate *** CORAM:-HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. *** 1) Whether Reporters of the 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? *** SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 28.4.2008 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr.Division), Nawanshahr as well as the order dated 9.5.2008 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Nawanshahr. Vide the above-mentioned orders, an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC moved by the petitioner-plaintiff has been dismissed and/or the said order has been affirmed. The respondent-defendant is in caveat. Learned counsel for the parties accordingly have been heard at length and the impugned orders have been perused. In the light of the consensus and agreement arrived at between learned counsel for the parties and on the basis of instructions received by them, this revision petition is disposed of with the following directions:- (i)the petitioner (plaintiff) as well as the respondent (defendant) shall be entitled to alienate their respective share only and not any specific khasra number out of the joint holding, though for the purpose of description of the land, khasra numbers of the entire joint holding can be mentioned in the sale deed. (ii)the respondent-defendant has already filed a suit for partition. The Revenue Court before whom the partition suit is pending, is directed to expedite and dispose of the same on or before 31.8.2008. (iii)the revenue Court shall not allow the parties to adopt any delaying tactics and if it finds that any one of them is seeking unnecessary adjournments, costs between Rs.5,000/- to Rs.10,000/- shall be imposed on such party. (iv)the other co-sharers shall also not be permitted to delay the partition proceedings as it is in the interest of everybody that their shares are separated and they are put in possession in terms thereof. (v)In the light of the above-mentioned directions made above at Sr.Nos.(i) to (iv), learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to withdraw the suit, however, the aforesaid directions shall continue to operate. (vi)As soon as the partition takes place, the parties shall be entitled to alienate and/or deal with their respective shares in the manner they like. Disposed of. May 28, 2008 ( SURYA KANT ) poonam JUDGE