IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 3356 of 2007 (O&M) Date of decision: 15.04.2009 Prahalad Singh .............Petitioner Vs. Sumer Chand ............Respondent Present: Mr. Adarsh Jain, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Suman Jain, Advocate for the respondent. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 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) 1. Petition for eviction filed under Section 13 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 was dismissed, upholding the contention of the tenant that there had been a partition in the family and the petition mentioned premises had been allotted to the landlord's brother. The registered instrument of partition had been broughtforth as evidence and the Courts below have concurrently found that the landlord was not entitled to maintain the petition and that the petitioner himself was not the landlord of the respondent in respect of the premises. 2. There is no error in the findings recorded by the Courts below and civil revision petition is accordingly dismissed. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE April 15, 2009 Pankaj*