IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No. 442 of 2010 Date of decision: 15.12.2010. Leelavati and another …Petitioners. Versus Krishan Chand Sharma …Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Deepak Gupta, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioners: Ms. Seema Guleria, Advocate. For the respondent: None. Deepak Gupta, J. (Oral) 1. This petition is directed against the order dated 20.11.2010 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division) Court No. IV, Shimla, whereby the application filed by the present petitioners (here-in-after referred to as the plaintiffs) for appointment of Local Commissioner to demarcate the boundary has been rejected only on the ground that issues have still not been framed. 2. The apprehension of Ms. Seema Guleria, learned counsel for the petitioners, is that in view of the dismissal of the application petitioners will not be permitted to file application at a later stage and since the application has been dismissed only on the ground that issues have still to be framed, it should have rejected as being pre mature and this Court should clarify this matter. Therefore, while upholding the order of the learned trial 1 Whether the reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes. 2 Court it is clarified that since the application has been rejected as being pre mature only on the ground that issues have still to be framed this order will not operate as res judicata and the petitioner can again file an application, if so advised, which shall be decided strictly in accordance with law. The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No order as to costs. 15th December, 2010 (Deepak Gupta) ™ Judge