IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R. S. A. No. 660 of 2005 (O&M) Date of decision : April 23, 2008 Sujan Singh ....Appellant versus Raghbir Singh and others ....Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pritam Pal Present : Mr. Rahul Dhanotia Advocate for Mr. Avnish Mittal, Advocate for the appellant Pritam Pal,J. (Oral) This regular second appeal by plaintiff is directed against judgment and decree dated 20.9.2001 passed by learned trial court whereby a suit for possession with consequential relief of permanent injunction in respect of the suit property claiming to be part and parcel of Khasra No. 100, was dismissed. Thereafter appeal filed by the appellant was also dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 6.12.2004 passed by learned first appellate court. This is how feeling aggrieved, the appellant has come up in this appeal. Both the courts below have given concurrent findings that the suit property is not the part and parcel of Khasra No. 100 which is stated to be owned and possessed by the appellant. The above findings arrived at by the courts below are based on cogent and convincing evidence and as such the same cannot be said to be perverse or unreasonable in any manner. R. S. A. No. 660 of 2005 (O&M) -2- Moreover, learned counsel for the appellant could not make out any substantial question of law in this appeal for consideration by this Court. Hence, this appeal is dismissed in limine. ( Pritam Pal ) April 23, 2008 Judge 'dalbir'