LPA No. 2139 of 2011 -1- In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh LPA No. 2139 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 01.12.2011 Market Committee, Ambala City & another ....... Appellants Versus Anil Kumar & others ........ Respondents Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice M.M. Kumar Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Narain Raina **** Present: Mr. Namit Gautam, Advocate for the appellants. **** 1. To be referred to the reporters or not ? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest? M.M. Kumar, J. 1. These appeals* filed under Clause X of the Letters Patent Appeal are directed against the judgment dated 9.5.2011 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court. The only issue raised by the learned counsel for the appellants is that CWP No. 14305 of 2003 was decided in respect of New Grain Market (Extension), Ambala City on 4.11.2004. In the aforesaid order the Division Bench has recorded the admitted position of availability of water supply and sewerage facility which had been provided in October, 2002. However, the Division Bench has taken the support for this view of another order passed on 7.8.2003 rendered in CWP No. 4190 of 2002 by another Division Bench which was in respect of another Grain Market of a different town. The writ petition decided by learned Single Judge by the impugned judgment was in respect of Grain Market (Extension), Ambala LPA No. 2139 of 2011 -2- City. The Division Bench in its order dated 7.8.2003 had issued directions with regard to payment of interest for the reason that facilities regarding water supply, sewerage and other amenities were not provided and, therefore, interest till October, 2002 was not payable. The grievance made is that the order which has been passed in respect of the New Grain Market (Extension), Ambala City specifically recorded the fact that the facilities have been provided in October, 2002 and, therefore, the argument that the interest would be payable after that date. These facts have not been clearly projected before the learned Single Judge. Consequently, a factual error in the order passed by the learned Single Judge has crept in. 2. In view of the above, we relegate the petitioner to the remedy of filing a review. These appeals are accordingly disposed of. 3. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of each connected case. (M.M.KUMAR) JUDGE (RAJIV NARAIN RAINA) JUDGE December 01, 2011 ‘sp’ * Sr. No. LPA No. Title 1 2139 Market Committee, Ambala City & another vs. Anil Kumar and others 2 2140 Market Committee, Ambala City & another vs. Parveen Kumar and others 3 2141 Market Committee, Ambala City & another vs. Sher Pal and others 4 2142 Market Committee, Ambala City & another vs. Naresh Kumar and others 5 2143 Market Committee, Ambala City & another vs. Shadi Lal and others LPA No. 2139 of 2011 -3- Sr. No. LPA No. Title 6 2144 Market Committee, Ambala City & another vs. Kanwar Manjit Singh and others 7 2145 Market Committee, Ambala City & another vs. Gulzar Singh and others 8 2146 Market Committee, Ambala City & another vs. Kulwant Singh and others 9 2147 Market Committee, Ambala City & another vs. Tarsem Chand and othrs 10 2148 Market Committee, Ambala City & another vs. Om Parkash and others 11 2153 Market Committee, Ambala City & another vs. Tej Parkash and others (M.M.KUMAR) JUDGE (RAJIV NARAIN RAINA) JUDGE December 01, 2011 ‘sp’