R.S.A No. 3296 of 2007 (O&M) ::1:: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A No. 3296 of 2007 (O&M) Date of decision : October 28, 2009 Rati Ram, ...... Appellant (s) v. Shyam Lal and others, ...... Respondent(s) *** CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI *** Present : Mr. Gorakh Nath, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Rameshwar Malik, Advocate with Mr. Hitesh Malik, Advocate for respondent No.1. *** 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 decreeing the suit of the plaintiff/respondent No.1 for permanent injunction restraining the appellant from interfering in his possession over the property in dispute as well as for an order imposing punishment of one month civil imprisonment on the appellant for violating the injunction order dated 21.11.1997. The following questions have been proposed :- R.S.A No. 3296 of 2007 (O&M) ::2:: “ 1. Whether there was any evidence on the basis of which it could be found out and held that finding could be recorded about the existence and location of 76 plots out of khasra No.204 ? 2. Whether on the basis of the report Ex.P1 it could possibly be determined as to whether or not khasra No.204/62 allegedly allotted to the plaintiff existed and was located ? 3. Whether there was any legal, admissible and reliable evidence to prove that the shop and the houses which had been constructed by the defendant had been constructed after 21.11.1997 ? 4. Whether there was any legal, admissible and reliable evidence to establish that the defendants had violated the temporary injunction issued on 21.11.1997 ? 5. Whether there was any Tatima had been prepared after carving out 76 plots out of Khasra No.204 and whether there was any evidence on record to establish as to in which portion ofKhasra No.204, 76 plots had been carved out and in an area of27kanals and as to in which direction and in which portion of khasra No.204 those 76 plots existed and had been cared out ? 6. Whether 76 plots which had been carved out of khasra No.204 were traceable and could be identified ? 7. Whether the plaintiff had been able to establish as to where his plot measuring 3 marlas and allegedly R.S.A No. 3296 of 2007 (O&M) ::3:: bearing Khasra No.204/62 was situated and located ? 8. Whether the appreciation of evidence by the two courts below was erroneous and the courts below had mis-appreciated and mis-construed the evidence on record ? 9. Whether the conclusions drawn by the two courts below were totally unsustainable and were not based on reliable and acceptable evidence ? It would be seen that all the questions proposed are pure questions of fact and relate to appreciation of evidence. Counsel for the appellant has not been able to persuade me that the findings recorded thereon are either based on no evidence or are based on such misreading of evidence as would require interference of this Court under Section 100 of the CPC. Consequently, this appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. As the main appeal has since been dismissed, all the pending civil miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. October 28, 2009 ( AJAY TEWARI ) kk JUDGE