RSA No.4146 of 2006 -1- In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. Date of decision: 13.05.2008. Mohinder Singh ... Appellant VerSus Bakhshish Singh ... Respondent. CORAM HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI Present: Mr.RK Garg, Advocate,for the appellant. Mr.Padam Jain, Advocate,for the respondent. PERMOD KOHLI, J. (Oral): This is defendants Regular Second Appeal against the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the learned Courts below. Respondent Bakhshish Singh filed a suit for possession by way of specific performance of agreement dated 21.05.2002 in respect of land measuring 6 Kanals 16 Marlas as specified in the plaint. The defendant-appellant in the reply denied the execution of the agreement as also the receipt of earnest money of Rs.1,70,000/-. On the pleadings of the parties, the learned trial Court framed as many as six issues. The main issue being issue No.1, is reproduced as under:- RSA No.4146 of 2006 -2- “Whether the plaintiff is entitled to possession of the suit land by way of specific performance of agreement to sell dated 21.5.2002 on payment of balance amount of Rs.57,500/- ? OPP” Both the parties were allowed to lead their respective evidence. The plaintiff produced Sarwan Singh,attesting witness of the agreement as PW-2 and Sarabjit Singh, Deed-Writer, as PW4. The trial Court on the basis of the evidence on record decreed the suit vide its judgment and decree dated 27.02.2006. Aggrieved of the same, the defendant-appellant preferred an appeal in the Court of learned District Judge, Kapurthala. The learned Lower Appellate Court after examining the evidence on record affirmed the findings of fact recorded by the learned trial Court and consequently dismissed the appeal vide its judgment and decree dated 12.10.2006. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant argued that the defendant-appellant had pleaded that the agreement to sell is forged one. His further contention is that electricity connection was not the part of the sale. From the reading of the impugned judgment, it appears that both the learned Courts below have disbelieved the story of the appellant that the document is forged one. It is a question of appreciation of evidence. Regarding the electricity connection, no specific plea has been raised in the written statement and, thus, the learned Courts below have not returned a finding. No substantial question of law arises. RSA No.4146 of 2006 -3- In view of the above, I find no merit in the present appeal and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. 13.05.2008. (PERMOD KOHLI) BLS JUDGE Note: Whether to be referred to the Reporter?/ NO