IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Regular Second Appeal No. 3248 of 2009 Date of decision: 27th July, 2011 Vinod Kumar … Appellant Versus Ram Singh and others … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. P.R. Yadav, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Sanjay Mittal, Advocate for respondent No.1. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Present regular second appeal has been filed by defendant No.1 to the suit. Respondent No.1-plaintiff instituted a suit for injunction and he pleaded that he is a joint owner in possession of the suit land, details and description whereof were given in the plaint. The appellant- defendant No.1 had not denied that he is a co-sharer in the suit land but had stated that the oral partition of the suit land had taken place and to approach the Rasta Shareaam, respondent No.1-plaintiff was having another passage through the plot of defendants No.8 to 13. The trial Court had dismissed the suit holding that the parties even though are co-sharers, but are not following the oral partition arrived at between them and appellant-defendant No.1 is asserting 1/4th share over the suit property, therefore, continuation of Rasta will deprive him of enjoyment of the property. Regular Second Appeal No.3248 of 2009 Aggrieved against the order of trial Court, the respondent No.1-plaintiff had filed an appeal, which was accepted by the lower appellate Court on the ground that defendant No.2 had not questioned the oral partition and existence of Rasta. The Court further noticed that defendant No.1-present appellant in his written statement had stated that no construction is raised by him over the Rasta. Therefore, the suit of the plaintiff was accepted. During the course of arguments, counsel for the parties are in agreement that they will apply for partition of the suit land. They further agree that till the partition is effected, status-quo as it exists today will be maintained. However, counsel for the parties have stated that a direction be issued that in case they initiate partition proceedings within one month from today the same shall be decided within one year thereafter. After hearing counsel for the parties, this appeal is disposed of in view of the agreement arrived at between the parties that till the partition proceedings are completed, status-quo as it exists today shall be maintained. As stated by counsel for the parties, the application for partition proceedings shall be instituted within one month from today and in case such an application is instituted the authority concerned is directed to make every endeavour to decide the partition proceedings within one year from its institution. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE July 27, 2011 rps 2