IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No. 341 of 2010 Date of decision: 20.09.2010 Gian Kaur …Petitioner. Versus Sukh Dev Kaur & others …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Deepak Gupta, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner: Mr. Pratap Singh Goverdhan, Advocate. For the respondents: None. Deepak Gupta, J. (Oral) 1. This petition is directed against the order dated 16th August, 2010, whereby the plaintiff/respondent herein was permitted to file and prove some documents. 2. It is fairly conceded before me that pursuant to these orders, evidence has been led by the plaintiff. These documents have been proved on record and now, the case is fixed for rebuttal evidence of petitioner-defendant. In view of the fact that evidence has already been led and order was interlocutory in nature, I do not think that this is a fit case for exercise of supervisory powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. I, however, would like to 1 Whether the reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes. 2 make it clear that I have not expressed any opinion on merits of the order of the trial Court dated 16th August, 2010. In case, the case is finally decided against the petitioner, she shall be entitled to lay challenge to the order dated 16th August, 2010 on all grounds available to her. 3. With these observations, the petition is disposed of. No costs. (Deepak Gupta) Judge September 20, 2010 (rajni)