IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Revision No.6261 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 14.10.2011 Suresh Chander -----Petitioner Vs. Kailash Chander -----Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG 1. Whether reporters of local newspapers 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. Rajeev Kaswan, Advocate for the petitioner. --- RAKESH KUMAR GARG, J. This is tenant’s revision petition challenging the impugned order dated 27.8.2011 whereby warrant of possession was issued for the demised premises in favour of the respondent- landlord. From the averments made in the petition, it is suffice to say that eviction of the petitioner was ordered by the Rent Controller, Abohar vide order dated 26.4.2011 for non-payment of rent and that the petitioner has ceased to occupy the demised shop without sufficient cause for a continuous period of four months. C.R. No.6261 of 2011 Admittedly, the Appellate Authority has not stayed the operation of the order of eviction in favour of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner could not raise any objection against the impugned order except that his appeal is pending before the appellate authority. In the instant revision petition, except challenging the aforesaid order dated 27.8.2011, no grievance has been raised against the order of the Appellate Authority for not granting him the stay against the operation of the impugned order. Merely because appeal against the eviction order is pending, is no ground to set aside the impugned order of the executing Court. Thus, I find no merit in this petition. Dismissed. October 14, 2011 ( RAKESH KUMAR GARG ) ak JUDGE 2