R.S.A.No.1281 of 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A.No.1281 of 2009. Decided on: November 16, 2009. Gurdev Singh .. Appellant VERSUS Tarinderjit Singh and others .. Respondents * * * CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporter? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? * * * PRESENT Mr.Vijay Rana, Advocate, for the appellant. M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) Both the Courts below have dismissed the suit for injunction filed on the basis of ownership of the suit property observing that the appellant has not been able to describe the property in dispute as the property mentioned in the headnote of the plaint does not form part of plot Nos.42 & 43, and that the plaintiff has not been in possession of the same. . . . 1 R.S.A.No.1281 of 2009 No substantial question of law arises for adjudication in this case. Counsel has argued that an application for additional evidence to produce on record copy of Bandobast 1938 B.K., was dismissed by the lower appellate Court. Had said document been permitted to be proved, the result of the suit might have been different. I have perused the order dated 04.08.2008, by virtue of which the application for additional evidence has been dismissed by the lower appellate Court observing that no authenticity can be attached to the Certificate copy of which document was sought to be produced as it contained interpolation/ over-writing on the Certified copy. In view of the above circumstances, no interference is warranted. Dismissed. (M.M.S.BEDI) JUDGE November 16, 2009. rka . . . 2