RSA No.2150 of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No.2150 of 2008 Decided on : 13.11.2009 Jag Ram ... Appellant versus Bodan & others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI Present : Mr. B.K.Bagri, Advocate for the appellant. **** 1.Whether Reporters of local newspapers 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? AJAY TEWARI, J. (ORAL) This appeal has been filed against the judgments of the Courts below dismissing the suit filed by the appellant claiming ¼th share in the property of his father. Both the Courts below have found that firstly the appellant was not able to prove that the property was ancestral in nature and secondly that he had in fact separated from the family 10 years ago. The following questions have been proposed: i) Whether the decree and judgment passed by ld. Additional Session Judge dt. 04.06.1996 titled Bodan vs. Moolia in civil suit No.463 of 1990 which was dismissed by ld. SJIC, Rewari is null and void and not binding on the appellant-plaintiff? ii)Whether the appellant-plaintiff is entitled to get his RSA No.2150 of 2008 -2- share in the ancestral property of his father? iii)Whether the registration is compulsory when suit value more than Rs.100/- and hit by the provision of order 2 rule 2 CPC? iv)Whether the ld. Courts below have erred in law and facts in passing the judgment and decree? v)Whether the grave manifest injustice has been caused to the appellant? It would be seen that all the proposed questions are pure questions of fact. Learned counsel for the appellant has not been able to persuade me that the findings recorded are either based on no evidence or are based on such misreading of evidence which renders them so perverse as to be liable for interference under Section 100 of CPC. Consequently, this appeal is dismissed. November 13, 2009 (AJAY TEWARI) sonia JUDGE