IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No.93 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 17.2.2010 Shamsher Singh ......Appellant(s) Versus Harbax Singh and ors. ......Respondent(s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG * * * Present: Mr. J.S Thind, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Suresh Monga, Advocate for the respondents. Rakesh Kumar Garg, J.(Oral) CM No.2021-C of 2010 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. LRs of respondent No.1 are brought on record. RSA No.93 of 2009 This is plaintiff's second appeal challenging the judgment and decrees of the Courts below whereby his suit for permanent injunction restraining the respondents from interfering into his exclusive possession over the suit property was dismissed holding that the plaintiff-appellant had failed to prove himself to be the owner in possession of the suit property. Notice of motion was issued by this Court vide order dated 5.10.2009 on the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that there are chances of an amicable settlement between the parties. It may be noticed that respondents No.2 to 4 and 6 were served. However, no one has put in appearance on their behalf. As per Office report, respondent No.5 had died. However, the appellant has not taken any steps to bring on record his LRs. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of LRs of respondent No.1 has categorically stated that he has no instructions with regard to the RSA No.93 of 2009 (O&M) -2- amicable settlement of the dispute between the parties and has further submitted that LRs through their predecessors-in-interest are owners in possession of the property in dispute. Since there are no chances of amicable settlement, I find no justification in continuation of this appeal. Dismissed. February 17, 2010 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE