IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No. 326 of 2004 Date of decision: 06.12.2010. Surya Parkash .…Petitioner. Versus State of HP & Anr. …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner: None. For the respondents: Mr. Vivek Singh Thakur, Addl. AG. Deepak Gupta, J. (Oral) This petition is directed against the order dated 13.7.2004 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Nahan whereby he rejected the application filed by the petitioner (hereinafter to referred as plaintiff) for appointment of local commissioner to demarcate the property. 2. The case of the plaintiff is that Khasra No. 534/78/25 which is part of Khasra No. 534/78 is actually Khasra No. 200/86. This fact itself had to be proved by the plaintiff before such an application can be allowed. From the order, I find that 1 Whether the reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes. issues in the case were framed on 22.4.2003 and the case was listed for evidence of the plaintiff on 10.6.2003, 30.8.2003 and 7.10.2003 and thereafter another date was given for evidence of the plaintiff and it is only thereafter that such application was filed. It is obvious that such an application was filed with a view to delay the proceedings. Therefore, I find no merit in the petition which is accordingly rejected. The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the learned Trial Court who is directed to dispose of the suit at the earliest possible. (Deepak Gupta) Judge December, 6, 2010 (guleria)