R.S.A. No.3328 of 2008 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A. No.3328 of 2008 (O&M) Date of Decision : 20.03.2009 State of Haryana and others ....Appellants Versus Layak Ram and others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... Present : Mr. O.P.Sharma, Additional Advocate General, Haryana for the appellants. Mr. R.S.Mamli, Advocate for the respondents. ..... MAHESH GROVER, J. This appeal is directed against the judgments of the learned trial Court dated 1.11.2006 and the first Appellate Court dated 9.3.2007. The respondents filed a suit seeking to injunct the appellants from cutting and removing the trees standing on the suit land which belonged to them. The appellants, who were defendants in the suit, pleaded that the trees in question belonged to the Forest Department as they had planted and nourished the same and hence they have the right to cut them also, as the trees had now attained the age of maturity. R.S.A. No.3328 of 2008 (O&M) -2- On appraisal of evidence, the learned trial Court came to the conclusion that the land on which the disputed trees were standing belonged to the plaintiffs/respondents and there was no material on record from which it could be inferred that the trees belonged to the Forest Department. Accordingly, a conclusion was arrived at that the plaintiffs/respondents being owners of the land were also entitled to harvest the trees since those were planted on their land. In appeal, the learned first Appellate Court modified the findings of the leaned trial Court on issue No.1 and it was directed that the respondents shall deposit/pay to the appellants 15% of the value of the disputed trees within 30 days from the date of its sale. Learned counsel for the appellants contended that the findings recorded by the Courts below are erroneous and that the appellants who had planted the trees were very well within their right to cut the same. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that a pure finding of fact has been arrived at by the Courts below that the land belonged to the respondents and that the trees being planted on their land, they were very well within their right to harvest the same. The first Appellate Court has also rightly modified the findings of the learned trial Court on issue No.1 in view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the respondent that he has no objection if 15% of the sale price of the trees is given to the Forest Department/respondents. R.S.A. No.3328 of 2008 (O&M) -3- No question of law is shown to have arisen in the present appeal. Therefore, the same being devoid of any merit is dismissed. That apart, the appeal is barred by an inordinate delay of 501 days which has not been explained satisfactorily. 20.3.2009 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE dss