S.A.O.No.3 of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:-19.7.2010 Dev Raj @ Shiv Dev Raj ...Appellant Versus Lajpat Rai and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present:- Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate for the appellant. Mr.C.B.Goel, Advocate for the respondents. M ehinder S ingh S ullar , J. (Oral) The compendium of the facts, relevant for disposal of the present appeal and emanating from the record, is that the suit filed by Lajpat Rai and Suresh Kumar sons of late Chanan Mal respondent-plaintiffs (hereinafter to be referred as “the plaintiffs”) against Dev Raj alias Shiv Dev Raj son of late Chanan Mal appellant-defendant No.1 and other defendants (hereinafter to be referred as “the defendants) for a decree of separate possession, mesne profits and permanent injunction, was partly decreed by the trial Court, vide judgment and decree dated 11.11.2003. 2. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the trial Court, the defendants filed the appeal, which was accepted, the judgment and decree of the trial Court were set aside and the case was remanded to the trial Court with a direction to pass a fresh preliminary decree declaring the rights of the parties by the Ist Appellate Court, vide impugned judgment and decree dated 22.8.2006. 3. Appellant Dev Raj son of Chanan Mal, one of the defendants, still did not feel satisfied with the impugned judgment and decree and filed the instant appeal. 4. During the course of hearing of the appeal, on the previous date i.e. 7.5.2010, learned counsel stated that after the remand, the trial Court has heard the final arguments in the matter and sought time to ascertain the fate thereof. Hence, S.A.O.No.3 of 2007 2 the appeal was adjourned for today. Today, Mr.C.B.Goel, Advocate counsel for the respondents has stated at the bar that after the remand of the matter, the trial Court has already finally decided the main case, vide judgment and decree dated 29.3.2010. This fact has been fairly acknowledged by the learned counsel for the appellant. 5. Therefore, once the suit has already been finally decided by the trial Court, then the present appeal becomes infructuous. Consequently, the present appeal is hereby dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. (Mehinder Singh Sullar) 19.7.2010 Judge AS