IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 7194 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: January 31, 2011 M/s Joonix India .. Petitioner Vs. Hari Kishan Goel .. Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. Ritesh Khatri, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. A.P. Bhandari, Advocate for the respondent. A.N. Jindal, J This petition assails the orders dated 16.8.2010, 14.9.2010 and 27.10.2010 passed by the trial court. The facts in the background of the case are that a preliminary decree dated 24.12.2009 was passed in favour of the decree holder- respondent (herein referred as, 'the respondent') and against the judgment debtor- petitioner (herein referred as, 'the petitioner') whereby Tehsildar, Faridabad was appointed as Receiver -cum- Local Commissioner. The respondent had moved an application for passing the final decree in terms of the preliminary decree dated 24.12.2009. On the objection raised by both the parties, regarding the working of the Receiver-cum Local Commissioner, the trial court directed both the parties to supply names of Local Commissioner, at which the petitioner had suggested to appoint some Government Official to work as Local Commissioner. However, the trial court turned down his request on the ground that the Accountant of the Government Agencies are busy in their official working and could not dedicate time as is apparent in the case of earlier Local Commissioner appointed in this case. As a matter of fact, it was the prayer of both the parties to appoint one Chartered Accountant as a Local Commissioner and as such the trial court appointed Mr. Sanjeev, Chartered Accountant, Faridabad as Local Commissioner. Now the petitioner has come up with the plea that the private Chartered Accountant could not be appointed as Local Commissioner. In this regard, it may be observed that when once the petitioner has consented that the Chartered Civil Revision No. 7194 of 2010 (O&M) -2- *** Accountant should be appointed as a Local Commissioner in this case and now it does not lie in his mouth saying that the order passed by the trial court appointing Mr. Sanjeev, Chartered Accountant, Faridabad as Local Commissioner is illegal, erroneous and incorrect. The trial court appears to have taken right view of the matter and the impugned order dated 16.8.2010 being well founded and well reasoned, does not call for any interference by this Court. As regards the orders dated 14.9.2010 and 27.10.2010, the same are passed by the trial court in routine and as such need no interference. Dismissed. January 31, 2011 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge