LPA No. 322 of 2010 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. LPA No. 322 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 08.03.2010 Sohan Singh ....Appellant. Versus State of Punjab and others ....Respondents. Coram:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Singh 1.Whether reporters of local news papers may be allowed to see judgement ? 2. To be referred to reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? Present: Mr. Rupinder Kaur, Advocate for the appellant. ... Alok Singh, J. 1. By the present Letters Patents Appeal, the appellant is assailing order dated 20.5.2009 passed by learned Single Judge whereby dismissing CWP No.6568 of 2008 on the ground that order impugned in the writ petition Annexure P-7 was also assailed in CWP No.17753 of 2007, which was confirmed by this Court vide order dated 13.2.2008 and CWP No.17753 of 2007 was dismissed. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that since in CWP No.17753 of 2007, the appellant was not a party and the order impugned Annexure P-7 dated 3.3.2007 was also obtained at the back of the appellant by playing fraud and in collusion with the Gram Panchayat, hence, nothing observed therein can curtail the right of the appellant. It was further argued by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant has obtained decree for specific performance pertaining to the disputed land and to deprive the LPA No. 322 of 2010 2 fruit of the decree, Gram Panchayat collided with Gurmej Singh, Sukhdev Singh, Jagdev Singh, Gurmit Singh and Jagmit Singh. According to learned counsel for the appellant, above persons have absolutely no concern with the property in dispute and the property in dispute was allotted way back in 1950 in favour of Gurbachan Singh and Gurbachan Singh, who agreed to sell the property in dispute to the appellant and thereafter, suffered decree of specific performance. 3. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant, we are of the view that since order Annexure P-7 dated 3.3.2007 was confirmed in CWP No.17753 of 2007, hence learned Single Judge has committed no mistake or illegality in passing the impugned order herein. In the writ petition, question of fact as to whether order Annexure P-7 was obtained by fraud or with collusion of Gram Panchayat, cannot be gone into. However, the appellant shall be at liberty to seek an appropriate remedy in proper forum challenging the order Annexure P-7 dated 3.3.2007 on the ground of fraud, misrepresentation and collusion. We agree with learned counsel for the appellant that the orders dated 3.3.2007, and 13.2.2008 dismissing CWP No.17753 of 2007 shall not come in the way of the appellant as res judicata since the appellant was not a party therein. 4. In view of the above, we are not inclined to interfere with the view taken by learned Single Judge. 5. The appeal is dismissed. ( Alok Singh ) Judge ( Adarsh Kumar Goel ) Judge 08.03.2010 sk.