CR No.2680 of 2010 1 IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH CR. No.2680 of 2010 Date of Decision: 26.04.2010 Ravinder ...petitioner Versus Bhagat Singh and others .....Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Singh Present: Mr. Rameshwar Malik, Advocate for petitioner. ..... Alok Singh, J. (Oral) Present petition is filed challenging the order dated 08.04.2010 thereby rejecting the application under Rule 10 of Order 22 CPC. Registry of this Court has made noting that no paragraph is mentioned in the petition about the availability of the alternate statutory remedy. Learned counsel for the petitioner made endorsement on the back of the petition that no alternate remedy is available challenging the order on the application under Rule 10 of Rule 22 CPC. In my humble opinion Registry should have pointed out that statutory appeal is available under order 43 Rule 1 (l) of CPC. Learned counsel for the petitioner at this stage admits that statutory appeal is provided under Rule 1 (l) of Order 43 CPC against the rejection of the application under Rule 10 of Order 22 CPC. In view of the above I am not inclined to entertain the petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India against the order of CR No.2680 of 2010 2 rejection of the application under Rule 10 of Order 22 CPC for the simple reason that petitioner has alternate remedy to challenge the same by way of filing appeal under Order43 Rule 1 (l) CPC. Petition is dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to avail alternate statutory remedy under Order 43 (1) (l) CPC, if so advised. (ALOK SINGH) JUDGE 26.04.2010 sharmila