IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.3160 of 2009 Date of decision:28.05.2009 Jagbir Singh ...Petitioner versus Mohan Singh and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr. A.S.Sullar, Advocate, for the petitioner. ----- 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 ? K.Kannan, J.(Oral) 1. The permission granted to the defendant to send document to the Printing Press at Nasik for examination whether a particular stamp paper had been issued in the year that it bore, is challenged in revision by the plaintiff on the ground that the defendant was merely trying to adopt a dilatory tactics. 2. The suit for specific performance is resisted by the defendant contending that the agreement itself is a fabrication and he never executed the agreement of sale. It was brought out in evidence already by a report under the Right to Information Act that the stamp vendor whose name that was found in the document was never a stamp vendor at the relevant time. The Court had, therefore, some grain of suspicion when it directed the document to be sent along with a Local Commissioner to secure the report from Nasik. The attempt of the Court Civil Revision No.3160 of 2009 - 2 - was to secure proof by a scientific process and such a discretion exercised by the Court cannot be stultified by a vague allegation that the process would brook delay. If there is any delay, it is inevitable. There is no merit in the revision and is, accordingly, dismissed. ( K.KANNAN) JUDGE 28.05.2009 sanjeev