R.S.A No. 756 of 2007 (O&M) ::1:: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A No. 756 of 2007 (O&M) Date of decision : April 23, 2010 Mukhtiar Singh, ...... Appellant (s) v. Hira Singh and others, ...... Respondent(s) *** CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI *** Present : Mr. Vijay Lath, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. T.S.Chauhan, Advocate for the respondents. *** 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) C.M No.2038-C of 2007 For the reasons recorded, C.M is allowed and delay of 69 days in filing the appeal is condoned. RSA No.756 of 2007 This appeal has been filed against concurrent judgments of the Courts below dismissing the suit of the appellant for permanent injunction restraining the respondents from interfering in his possession over the suit land. As per the appellant, he had built his house on plot No.15. In R.S.A No. 756 of 2007 (O&M) ::2:: adjoining plot No.16 there was Harijan Dharamshala but a part of that plot was in his possession which was being used as a Bara for the last 40 years. Admittedly, the land belonged to the Custodian Department. The appellant relied upon a resolution of the Gram Panchayat dated 16.10.1979 as per which his possession was recognized. He further relied upon the affidavits of the Members of the Gram Panchayat who also asserted that the appellant was in possession. The trial Court found that in the year 1994 also, the appellant had filed a similar suit against the same respondents. The said suit was dismissed as withdrawn on 1.8.2000 on the basis of a statement that the appellant wanted to withdraw the suit to move an application before the Custodian Department for allotment of the said land. Instead of moving an application for allotment, the instant suit was filed on 9.9.2000 after 40 days. The lower appellate Court also relied upon some judgments of this Court as well as the predecessor Court viz Lahore High Court to hold that mere using of Bara for tethering cattle, constructing mangers or storing manure etc. would not prove established possession so as to provide an actionable claim to a person. In the present case also, the appellant is not seeking any title in the property in dispute. He is merely arguing that he is using the land in dispute as a Bara for tethering cattle, constructing mangers or storing manure, and has also installed a hand pump. The following questions have been proposed :- “ I) Whether the fencing, construction of cemented menger and installation of hand pump on the suit land by the appellant is not an overt act to possess the suit land exclusively with an intention to exclude the others ? R.S.A No. 756 of 2007 (O&M) ::3:: II) Whether the documents Ex.P-3 a resolution dated 26.10.1979 of Gram Panchayat and Ex.P1 an affidavit dated 3.11.1994 sworn by the members of Gram Panchayat, which shows the possession of the appellant over the suit land are not sufficient to establish the possession of the appellant over the suit property ? III) Whether the appellant who is in possession of the suit property is not entitled for the relief of injunction against the respondents who failed to prove their right over the suit property ? IV) Whether the mis-reading of the pleading and documentary evidence in the light of oral evidence and perversity of finding arrived at by the learned Courts below amounts to substantial question of law, which clearly and candidly gives power to this Hon'ble Court to interfere ?” It would be seen that all the questions proposed are pure questions of fact. In view of the circumstances brought out above, counsel for the appellant has not been able to persuade me that the findings recorded by the Courts below are either based on no evidence or are based on such misreading of evidence so as to render the same so perverse as to be liable for interference under Section 100 of the CPC. As the main appeal has since been dismissed, all the pending civil miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. ( AJAY TEWARI ) April 23, 2010. JUDGE `kk' R.S.A No. 756 of 2007 (O&M) ::4::