IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.5623 of 2008 Date of decision:21.03.2009 Balwinder Singh ...Petitioner versus Malak Singh and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr. Harkesh Manuja, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. C.B.Goel, Advocate for the respondents. 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 ? K.Kannan, J.(Oral) 1. The impugned order was one dismissing an application filed by the plaintiff for framing additional issues on the basis of his pleadings relating to the nature of property whether it was ancestral or not and other issues arising out of the pleadings. When in an earlier round of litigation, the defendant was propounding a Will said to have executed by their common ancestor, Shangara Singh, it had culminated in final disposal by a decree of this Court. When the suit was filed by the present plaintiff questioning the proceedings where his father was a party, this Court had already directed vide order dated 21.04.2008 that the parties would be permitted to lead evidence whether the suit is barred by principle of res judicata on the basis of the decree passed in Civil Revision No.5623 of 2008 - 2 - earlier suit titled as Malak Singh versus Kala Singh and others. The whole controversy ought to therefore be resolved with reference to the boundary circumscribed by the order of this Court already made on 21.04.2008 and the plaintiff cannot reopen all the disputes and seek for adjudication on all the pleadings that he has adverted to. Perhaps the issue of re-judicata will have to unravel whether the plaintiff is claiming title in his own right as a coparcener or through his father. It will be open to the plaintiff to let in such evidence as a contention may require. The Court below had considered the point in its correct perspective and had dismissed the petition. There is no scope for intervention in revision. Revision petition is dismissed. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 21.03.2009 sanjeev