C.R. No.5244 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.5244 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 20.8.2010 Smt. Renu Aneja ……Petitioner VERSUS Khem Chand and others ……Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH -.- Present: Mr. Arvind Kumar , Advocate for Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. 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? ALOK SINGH, J. (ORAL) 1. Present petition is filed challenging the order dated 3.8.2010 passed by learned Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Kurukshe- tra, thereby rejecting the amendment application against the order dated 9.5.2008. 2. Learned Appellate Court vide order dated 3.8.2010 has recorded that issue No.3 is pertains to the maintainability of the suit and to prove this issue the defendants are at liberty to adduce any C.R. No.5244 of 2010 (O&M) -2- sort of evidence like such notification, which they want to produce by way of amendment in the written statement. The said notification is issued by the Government. Even otherwise, Court is always at liberty to draw legal presumption pertaining to any Government notification and order. In view of this, amendment application taking pleading pertaining to the notification does not require. Even in the absence of the pleading, petitioner can place reliance on the said notification and learned trial Court shall take into consideration the validity and applicability of the notification. 3. In view of this, learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this petition. 4. Allowed as prayed for. 5. Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. ( ALOK SINGH ) 20th August, 2010 JUDGE ashish