IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CR No. 2054 of 2011. [O&M] Date of Decision: 21st November, 2011. Jai Raj Petitioner through Mr. J.S.Cooner, Advocate Versus Som Parkash & Ors. Respondents through Mr. A.K.Jain, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT. 1. Whether Reporters of 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 under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 04.03.2011 passed by the learned District Judge, Ambala, setting aside the order dated 18.09.2010 passed by learned Civil Judge [Junior Division], Ambala granting ad-interim injunction in favour of the petitioner-plaintiffs to the extent that the parties were directed to maintain status-quo in relation to the land/property in dispute. This Court, while issuing notice of motion vide order dated 23.03.2011 also directed the parties to maintain status-quo with regard to Khasra No. 291/1 but ad-interim injunction qua premises bearing No. 251/1 and 292/1 was declined. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the reasons assigned by learned District Judge, which may not be substituted by this Court in exercise of its powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, it does appear that the order dated 23.03.2011 deserves to be made absolute till the conclusion of the suit. However, it will not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. Consequently, this revision is partly allowed and while directing the parties to maintain status-quo regarding Khasra No. 291/1, the prayer for maintaining status-quo qua the premises bearing No. 251/1 and 292/1 is declined. Disposed of. Dasti. November 21, 2011. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE