R.S.A. No. 1472 of 2009 1 IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A. No. 1472 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision : 15.4.2009 Bag Singh .......... Appellant Versus Gram Panchayat of village Kharajpur & another ...... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA Present : Mr. B.S. Saini, Advocate for the appellant. **** VINOD K. SHARMA, J. (ORAL) This regular second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 21.1.2008 passed by the learned Courts below vide which suit filed by the plaintiff for permanent injunction restraining the Gram Panchayat from interfering in use of Pahi, has been ordered to be dismissed. The plaintiff / appellant brought a suit on the plea that defendants were preventing the plaintiff from passing through the drainage bandh for going to and coming from his fields through 5 Karams wide Pahi bearing Khasra No. 299 which is in existence since consolidation of holdings carried out in the village in the year 1954 and also from dismantling the Pahi at point “B' as shown in the Akas Latha and described in the head note of the plaint. The suit was contested wherein a specific plea was taken that the defendants were not interfering or damaging the Pahi as claimed by the R.S.A. No. 1472 of 2009 2 plaintiff / appellant. A positive stand was taken that the Pahi can be used by the plaintiff and other residents for agricultural purpose and not for commercial purpose. It was also the case of the defendants that in fact the plaintiff was trying to use the Pahi and had been carrying tractors for commercial purpose and was also dismantling the Pahi by taking the earth dug from the fields adjoining the Pahi. The learned Courts below on appreciation of evidence, recorded a concurrent finding of fact, that the plaintiff himself was trying to misuse the Pahi for commercial purpose, though, there was no restraint against him for using the same for agricultural purpose. The learned counsel for the appellant contends that this appeal raises the following substantial questions of law for consideration by this Court :- 1. Whether appellant can be prevented by the respondents from passing through the drainage bandh through 5 karams wide Pahi bearing Khasra No. 299 which is in existence since 1954 ? 2. Whether the judgments and decree passed by the learned Courts below is based on misreading of evidence, thus, perverse ? In support of the substantial questions of law the learned counsel for the appellant contends, that this Pahi was in existence, since the year 1954, therefore, the defendant / respondents have no right to interfere in use of the same. The learned Courts below are in error in dismissing the suit filed by the plaintiff / appellant for permanent injunction. R.S.A. No. 1472 of 2009 3 There is no force in the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the appellant. In the written statement the defendant / respondents took a positive stand that plaintiff was trying to use the Pahi for commercial purpose and was dismantling the Pahi by taking the earth dug from the fields adjoining the Pahi which is likely to damage the Pahi, and is otherwise against public interest. The learned counsel for the appellant contends that plaintiff / appellant does not want to use the Pahi for commercial purpose but for agricultural purpose. There is hardly any reason to interfere with the concurrent finding of fact recorded by the learned Courts below, the learned Court or the defendant / respondents have not debarred the plaintiff from using the Pahi for agricultural purpose. He has been only stopped from using it for commercial purpose, which cannot be permitted. There is no merit in the appeal and the substantial question of law do not arise in this appeal. Dismissed. 15.4.2009 ( VINOD K. SHARMA ) 'sp' JUDGE