RSA No.3876 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CM No.11827-28-C of 2009 & RSA No.3876 of 2009 Decided on : 29.10.2009 Mukhtiar Singh ... Appellant versus Bhagwan & others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI Present : Mr. Surender Deswal, 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) CM No.11827-C of 2009 For the reasons mentioned in the application, delay of 100 days in filing the appeal is condoned. CM stands disposed of. RSA No.3876 of 2009 This appeal has been filed against the judgments of the Courts below dismissing the suit of the appellant-plaintiff for possession over 2 biswa of land. The ground taken by the appellant-plaintiff was that the respondents were licensees while the stand of the respondent was that they were purchasers. Both the Court below have accepted the plea of the respondent that they were purchasers and were in possession in their own right and consequently, dismissed the suit. The following questions RSA No.3876 of 2009 -2- have been proposed: i) Whether the plaintiff/appellant is owner of the suit land and the present suit is liable to be allowed in favour of plaintiff/appellant? ii)Whether the plaintiff/appellant is legally entitled to take the possession of the suit land from the respondents/defendants? iii)Whether the respondents/defendants have any right over the suit property? 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 and application for stay are dismissed. October 29, 2009 (AJAY TEWARI) sonia JUDGE