IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R. S .A. No. 3328 of 2005(O &M) Date of decision: 20.11.2007 Makhan ...Appellant Versus Prem Singh and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. R.S.Mittal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Atul Gaur, Advocate for the appellant. **** RAJESH BINDAL, J. The plaintiff is before this Court against the concurrent findings of fact by both the Courts below whereby he has been non suited. The claim made for protection of his possession on the plea of the same being continuous and hostile for the last about 35 years. The issue as to whether the plea of adverse possession is a cause of action to file a suit or not had been gone into by this Court in Bhim Singh and others Vs. Zile Singh and others 2006 (3) Recent Civil Reports (Civil) 97 wherein it has been answered against the proposition by holding that same is not a cause of action but a defence which can be raised in suit for possession filed by other party. When the suit itself was not maintainable on the ground of adverse possession, I do not find any substantial question of law arises in the present appeal and the same is dismissed. There is a delay of 210 days in filing the appeal. As suit filed by the appellant itself is found to be not maintainable in terms of the law laid down by this Court in Bhim Singh’s case (supra) and the issue involved in the appeal has been considered by this Court on merits, I do not wish to go into the reasons for delay in filing of the appeal. Dismissed. November 20, 2007 (Rajesh Bindal) Pka Judge