CR No.6690 of 2009 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.6690 of 2009 (O&M) Decided on :17.11.2009 Niranjan Singh ... Petitioner versus Dhara Singh ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI Present : Mr. Anand Chhibbar, Advocate for the petitioner. **** 1.Whether Reporters of local newspapers 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? AJAY TEWARI, J. (ORAL) This petition has been filed against the order dated 10.11.2009 whereby the Lower Appellate Court has held that an application under Order 41 Rule 25 would be taken up along with the main appeal. Learned counsel has argued that in the suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell respondent took up a completely vague plea regarding sale agreement. He further argued that no issue was raised with regard to the alleged forgery and fabrication in the document and it was in those circumstances that the application had been made before the ld. Appellate Court to frame an issue regarding the alleged forged and fabricated documents and remit the matter back to the Trial CR No.6690 of 2009 (O&M) -2- Court for finding thereon. As mentioned above, the ld. Lower Appellate Court has held that this grievance of the petitioner would be addressed when the appeal is taken up for hearing. It is not as if the ld. Lower Appellate Court has negatived the plea made by the petitioner. In case while hearing the appeal (as pointed out by the Lower Appellate Court itself) it comes to light that any essential issue has not been framed or that any party was prejudiced thereby the Court can take recourse to Order 41 Rule 25. With these observations, this petition is dismissed. No costs. Copy of this order be given under the signature of Court Secretary. November 17, 2009 (AJAY TEWARI) sonia JUDGE