IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.2798 of 2009 Date of decision:18.05.2009 Shirajjuddin ...Petitioner versus Sohrab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr. Rahul Vats, 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 ? K.Kannan, J.(Oral) The application for injunction which was dismissed by the two Courts below was so made on the basis of a reasoning that the plaintiff had an agreement of sale of the year 1988 and he was suing for specific performance of such an agreement. The Courts below found prima facie that there was no cause for such an inordinate delay and finding that there was no further case in favour of the plaintiff rejecting the claim for injunction. I see no reason to take a different view that how the matter has been dealt with by the Courts below. Civil Revision was accordingly dismissed and the plaintiff's right, if any, shall be adjudicated the trial of the suit uninfluenced by any directions or observations made by the authorities below in relation to the maintainability of the action. The Civil Revision is disposed of as dismissed. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 18.05.2009 sanjeev