RSA No. 2349 of 2007 (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No. 2349 of 2007 Date of Decision: 3.9.2009 Ram Karan and another ......Appellants Versus Ram Kala .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers 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? Present: Shri O.P. Nagpal, Advocate, and Shri Jatinder Nagpal, Advocate, for the appellants. Shri Suresh Goyal, Advocae, for LRs of the respondent. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (Oral). The plaintiff is in second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the learned first Appellate Court, whereby their suit for permanent injunction was dismissed in appeal. It has been found by the learned first Appellate Court that since the plea of adoption raised by the appellant-plaintiffs, has been negated in the other suit filed by the respondent, wherein the possession of the defendants is found to be that of co-sharers and the entries in the revenue record regarding exclusive possession of the plaintiffs, were ordered to be corrected. Therefore, the plaintiffs were found not entitled to in junction. The plaintiffs claim to be in exclusive possession of the suit property for the reason that the defendant has no right in the estate of Mangal in view of his adoption by Dalipu. Such stand has been found to be RSA No. 2349 of 2007 (2) not tenable in RSA Nos. 2348 and 2350 of 2007. Thus, the parties would be co-sharers. Each co-sharer is deemed to be in possession of the suit property. The only right available to the parties is to seek partition to claim exclusive possession over the same. Consequently, I do not find any patent illegality or material irregularity in the finding recorded, which may give rise to any substantial question of law in the present second appeal. Hence, the present appeal is dismissed. (HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE 03-09-2009 ds