IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 6613 of 2008 (O&M) Date of decision: 21.4.2009 Gurdev Singh .. Petitioner Vs. Harnek Singh and another .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. Rajeev Godara, Advocate for the petitioner. Rajesh Bindal J. Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 22.1.2008, passed by the learned court below, whereby the appeal filed by the respondents- defendants against the order of the learned trial court, was accepted. Briefly, the facts are that the petitioner filed a civil suit against the respondents, in which order of status quo was passed by the trial court on 25.2.2000. The petitioner filed application under Order 39 Rule 2-A CPC on 22.5.2000 by alleging that on 2.3.2000, at about 10.00 A.M., the respondents started raising construction on the wall in question and thereby violated the orders of the Court. The trial court sentenced the respondents to civil prison for 15 days each. In appeal, the learned court below reversed the finding of the trial court. As has been noticed by the learned court below in the impugned order that a Local Commissioner was appointed who visited the spot on 25.2.2000 and in his report he had stated that construction had already been completed on 25.2.2000 and thus, there was no occasion for the respondents to again raise construction on 2.3.2000. On a pointed query by the court, learned counsel for the petitioner very fairly stated that even the suit was ultimately dismissed. For the reasons mentioned above, I do not find any reason to interfere in the impugned order. Dismissed. (Rajesh Bindal) Judge 21.4.2009 mk