IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Regular Second Appeal No. 3760 of 2009 Date of Decision : October 20, 2009 House Federation, Ferozepur through its Manager and another ....Appellants Versus Lakhveer Singh and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN Present : Ms. Puja Chopra, Advocate T.P.S. MANN, J. Suit for declaration filed by Lakhveer Singh-respondent was decreed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ferozepur on 5.6.2006. A decree for declaration to the effect that he was not liable for payment of Rs.1,43,989/- to the defendants on the basis of alleged mortgage of suit land measuring 20 kanals situated in village Karmuwala, Tehsil and District Ferozepur, was passed in his favour and against the defendants. The latter were restrained from effecting recovery of any amount from the plaintiff by way of attachment/sale of the land in question on the basis of arbitration award dated 14.7.2003. Aggrieved of the same, the defendants filed the first appeal, which was dismissed by learned Additional District Judge, Ferozepur on 7.1.2009. Two of the defendants are now before this Court by way of second appeal filed under Section 100 R.S.A. No. 3760 of 2009 -2- of the Code of Civil Procedure. Though,the defendants claimed that it was Kartar Singh, father of Lakhveer Singh-plaintiff, who impersonated himself as Lakhveer Singh and filed all the documents on his for the purposes of obtaining loan yet they did not prove the loan application form and the other documents. The documents regarding verification of the identity of the loanee and ownership upon the land were not placed on the file. The mortgage deed and other documents said to have been executed by someone posing himself as the plaintiff were in possession of the defendants. As the same were not produced, learned Courts below rightly held that an adverse influence ought to be drawn against the defendants. Admittedly, the plaintiff was not the member of the Society. As such, he was competent to file a civil suit so as to seek declaration against the recovery sought to be effected from him by the defendants. The concurrent findings of facts arrived at by the learned Courts below are based on appreciation of the material evidence available on the file. Such findings cannot be said to be either perverse or suffering from any illegality or infirmity. These cannot be in interfered with in a second appeal, which is maintainable only on some substantial question of law and not otherwise. None of the substantial questions of law, as formulated by learned counsel for the appellants, arises for determination. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed in limine. R.S.A. No. 3760 of 2009 -3- ( T.P.S. MANN ) October 20, 2009 JUDGE ajay-1