IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 8496 of 2010 Date of Decision: 03.01.2011 Sarita and another .... Petitioners Versus Mukesh and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present : Mr. Alok Jain, Advocate for the petitioners 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? ALOK SINGH, J. (ORAL) Learned counsel for the petitioners states that injunction application was allowed by the trial Court and appeal therefrom was dismissed and now petitioners are intending to challenge the order passed on injunction application before this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Learned counsel for the petitioners fairly stated that Local Commissioner ordinarily should not be appointed to collect the evidence, however, order passed on an application to appoint Local Commissioner should not come into the way of this Court while deciding the petition challenging the order on the injunction application. He has further stated that question of possession shall be argued in a petition challenging the order passed on injunction application. He seeks permission to withdraw this petition. Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. However, it is observed that in the event of challenging the injunction order, order impugned herein shall not prejudice the rights of the petitioners. (ALOK SINGH) 03.01.2011 JUDGE reena