IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R. S. A. No. 1475 of 2008 (O&M) Date of decision : May 15, 2008 Joginder Singh ....Appellant versus Ranjit Singh Rai and another ....Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pritam Pal Present : Mr. Hitesh Kaplash, Advocate for the appellant Pritam Pal,J. (Oral) This regular second appeal by plaintiff is directed against judgment and decree dated 29.1.2008 passed by learned District Judge, Kapurthala, whereby judgment and decree dated 19.8.2006 passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Phagwara, in a suit for declaration with consequential relief of permanent injunction was modified holding that the status of the parties qua the suit land shall be determined only after partition of the same. Suffice it to say that learned counsel for the appellant raised the plea that since compensation of some of the portion of the suit land was taken by the appellant in acquisition proceedings, therefore, he (appellant) be held exclusive owner in possession of the same. This contention merits no credence inasmuch as admittedly both the parties are co-sharers in the suit land and as such one of the parties R. S. A. No. 1475 of 2008 (O&M) -2- cannot claim its exclusive possession over any specific khasra number(s) unless the other co-sharer is proved to have relinquished his claim of possession over such joint khasra number(s). In this view of the matter, the learned first appellate court while relying upon the observation of the Full Bench in Bhartu vs Ram Sarup, 1981 PLJ 204, has rightly modified the judgment and decree passed by the trial court in favour of the appellant. Thus, the finding of the first appellate court in that behalf is not perverse or unreasonable in any manner. Even otherwise, learned counsel for the appellant could not make out any substantial question of law in this appeal for consideration by this Court. Hence, this appeal is dismissed in limine. ( Pritam Pal ) May 15, 2008 Judge 'dalbir'