IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No. 14096 of 2011 Date of Decision: 08.09.2011 Dhani Ram ..Petitioner Versus The Financial Commissioner and others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present: Mr. Mahavir Sandhu, Advocate, for the petitioner. 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? ALOK SINGH J. (ORAL) Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is in possession of the property in dispute, while respondent No.5 (nephew ) with the collusion of his father, who is holding the post of Lambardar and revenue authorities, got recorded the entry regarding his possession in the khasra-girdwari. Learned counsel has argued that the petitioner shall file a suit for injunction protecting his possession so that respondent No. 5 may not dispossess the petitioner from the property in dispute in the garb of illegal and manipulated entry secured by respondent no. 5. He has rightly submitted that civil suit shall be decided without being influenced by any wrongful entry made by the revenue authorities with the collusion of respondent No.5, therefore, he may be permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to file a suit for injunction. Dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. It goes without saying that any observation/finding or decision, impugned herein, shall not prejudice the mind of the Civil Court while deciding the suit filed by the petitioner on merit. (ALOK SINGH) JUDGE 08.09.2011 som