>r. No. Date V \ PRINTERS 01/05 % Orders IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RSA 210/2003 PROMILAGUPTA Appellant Through Mr.Sudhir Nandrajolg, Advocate. versus KANWAL KUMAR SAIGAL & ANR Respondents Through Mr. Alok Mahajan with Pt.Rajesh arya, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.S. SODHI ORDER 09.01.2006 CM.APPL.234/2006: This is an application for restoration. Cause shown in the application appears to be genuine. The application is allowed and disposed of. RSA 210/2003 is restored to original number and file. RSA 210/2003 & CM.APPL.721/2003: RSA 210/2003 seeks to challenge the order of the Additional District Judge in Appeal No.529/2000, which appeal was against the Judgment and decree dated 8.3.2000 passed by the Civil Judge, Delhi in suit No. 316/92. Learned Trial [RSA 210/2003] [page 1 of 2] Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified r. No. Date JHKHAND PRINTERS 01/05 Orders 13 Court vide its order dated 29.3.2003 lias dismissed tlie appeal. It is contended by counsel for the petitiner that mere suit for declaration in the present facts and circumstances would not lie. Counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, relies upon a judgment of the Supreme Court in Shanti Kumar Panda Vs. Shakuntala Devi. JT 2005(11) SC 122, where the law has been settled and where such a declaration would lie. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the judgment under challenge as also the judgment of the Supreme Court, I am of the view that concurrent findings of fact cannot be disturbed in a regular second appeal. RSA 210/2003 & CM.APPL.721/2003 are dismissed. Dasti. JANUARY 09, 2006 bp [RSA 210/2003] SODHI, J [page 2 of 2]