In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Civil Revision No. 4755 of 2008 Date of decision: March 31, 2009 Dharam Pal .. Petitioner Vs. Executive Engineer, Haryana State Agricultural Marketing Board, Kaithal .. Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. D.R. Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rajesh Sheoran, Advocate for the respondent. A.N. Jindal, J Having scrutinized the impugned order and the rival contentions raised by the learned counsel for the parties, the impugned order reflects no such defect or irregularity calling interference by this Court. However, a plea has been raised at this stage by the learned counsel for the Decree Holder that, as a matter of fact, the amount paid by the respondent should have been first adjusted towards interest and then towards principal amount. No such plea has been raised before the trial court by him. Under these circumstances, this revision sans any merit and is hereby dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to file application afresh on any other grounds if he is still aggrieved by the payment. March 31, 2009 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge