R.S.A No. 1729 of 2008 (O&M) ::1:: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A No. 1729 of 2008 (O&M) Date of decision : January 19, 2010 Mohammad Idris and others, ...... Appellant (s) v. Gram Panchayat, Kelgaon and Shahpura Khurd & others, ...... Respondent(s) *** CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI *** Present : Mr. Sanjay Bansal, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Shaveta Malhotra, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Rajesh Gupta, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2. Mr.Lokesh Sinhal, Advocate for respondents No.3 to 7. Mr. Saurav Mohunta, Advocate for respondents No.8 and 12. *** 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) This appeal has been filed against concurrent judgments of the Courts below dismissing the suit of the appellants for injunction restraining the respondents from interfering in their peaceful possession over the suit land measuring 9000 sq. yards. R.S.A No. 1729 of 2008 (O&M) ::2:: When confronted with the fact that the appellants are not in possession which is a pure finding of fact, learned counsel for the appellants, on the instructions of one of the appellants who is present in Court, prays for permission to withdraw this appeal with liberty to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action. The only caveat he has put is that any plea regarding constructive res judicata would not be taken by the respondents. Learned counsel for the respondents have very graciously stated that they are not averse to this cause of action and that in case the appellants file a fresh suit, they undertake not to take the plea of res judicata/constructive res judicata. In view of this settlement between the parties, this appeal is permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to the appellants to file a fresh suit for possession on the same cause of action. It is, however, clarified that the findings recorded in the instant proceedings would be relevant and admissible but would not be used as res judicata/constructive res judicata. As the main appeal has since been dismissed as withdrawn, all the pending civil miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. ( AJAY TEWARI ) January 19, 2010. JUDGE `kk'