IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.706 of 2009 Date of decision: 10.2.2009 Charanjit Singh ...Petitioner Versus Sandeep Singh and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D.ANAND. Present: Mr. Bhag Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. S.D.ANAND, J. The plea raised by the plaintiff-petitioner for the restraint of defendants-respondents from interfering in former's possession over the indicated land and from denying access to him for the use of the passage was declined by the learned Trial Court and also learned Ist Appellate Court, both of which noticed that a co-sharer cannot validly apply for the restraint of another co-sharer. There is plethora of law on the point that a revisional court would not be entitled to interfere in the exercise of judicial discretion by the Trial Court and the Ist Appellate Court except when it is noticed that the discretion had been exercised in a perverse manner. The present is not a case of that category. Both the Courts noticed valid and acceptable reasoning on behalf of the petitioner-plaintiff. The view obtained by both the Courts below deserves affirmation and it is so held accordingly. The petition is held denuded of merit and is ordered to be dismissed. February 10, 2009 (S.D.Anand) Pka Judge