Civil Revision No. 4396 of 2009 (O&M) 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Civil Revision No. 4396 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 6.8.2009 Manmohan Singh ......petitioner Versus Mehru @ Mehar Singh and another .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.Arun Jain, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Atul Kaushik, Advocate, for the petitioner. **** SABINA, J. Vide this revision petition, filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 16.5.2009 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr.Division), Ropar. Plaintiff Manmohan Singh had initiated proceedings under Section 39 Rule 2-A of the Code of Civil Procedure ('CPC” for short) alleging violation of order dated 17.1.2003 (Annexure P-1) passed by Civil Judge (Sr.Division), Ropar whereby in a suit filed by the Civil Revision No. 4396 of 2009 (O&M) 2 petitioner-plaintiff, parties were directed to maintain status quo with regard to the suit property. The order in the said proceedings was challenged. Both the parties would like to establish their case with regard to possession and construction etc. During the pendency of the application under Order 39 Rule 2-A CPC, an application was moved by the respondents for summoning Secretary, Gram Panchayat of Village Kotla Nihang along with record of resolution No.2 dated 6.12.1970 showing the entry with regard to panchayat proceedings from 27.7.1969 to 17.9.1973. Learned trial Court allowed the application for summoning of the said witness. The petitioner filed objections to the summoning of the Secretary, Gram Panchayat along with record. Vide the impugned order, the said objections/application filed by the petitioner was dismissed. Hence, the present revision petition. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that no ground for interference by this Court, while exercising power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is made out. The Secretary, Gram Panchayat of Village Kotla Nihang has been summoned by the respondents to establish certain entries with regard to the proceedings conducted by the panchayat. The petitioner would be given an opportunity to cross-examine the said witness. At this stage to deny the opportunity to the respondents to establish their stand by examining all relevant witnesses would Civil Revision No. 4396 of 2009 (O&M) 3 scuttle the ends of justice. In these circumstance, no ground for interference is made out. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. (SABINA) August 06, 2009 JUDGE anita