IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.1130 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision 17.02.2011 Anand Kumar ...... Petitioner VERSUS Vinod Kumar ...... Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.D.S.Nirban, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** A.N.JINDAL, J: Aggrieved against the order dated 06.01.2011 (Annexure P-7), passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Mahendergarh, allowing the application of respondent-defendant for appointment of revenue official as Local Commissioner, the petitioner-plaintiff has preferred this petition. Arguments heard. The Court vide impugned order has appointed the local commissioner to see the subsequent development and construction raised over the land in dispute during the pendency of the suit. However, there is no dispute with regard to the possession, as such, the Court was well within its right to appoint local commissioner to know about the existing situation at the spot and the construction made during the pendency of the suit. No grounds to interfere. Even otherwise, this petition, being not maintainable, is dismissed. (A.N.Jindal) Judge 17.02.2011 mamta-II