IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A.No.3810 of 2007 (O&M) Date of decision : 28.1.2010 Dharamvir and another ....Appellants Versus Naresh and another ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... Present : Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate for the appellants. Mr.Jaswant Jain, Advocate for respondent No.1. ..... MAHESH GROVER, J. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that on the joint statement of the parties the instant appeal can be disposed of. The dispute inter se between the parties is that they are co- sharers in the suit land measuring 14 kanals 2 marlas out of which 7 Kanals 10 Marlas is in possession of the appellants and 13 marlas is in possession of the respondents. Both the parties are in settled possession of their respective shares. The respondents filed a suit for mandatory and permanent injunction that the respondents be restrained from carrying out any further construction and they be also directed to remove the unauthorised construction already raised by R.S.A.No.3810 of 2007 (O&M) -2- them. The suit land continues to be joint and has not been partitioned till date. The courts below while decreeing the suit of the plaintiff- respondents restrained the appellants from raising any further construction till the partition is made. At the same time, the appellants have been directed to remove the unauthorised construction raised by them in the suit land as reflected in the site plan Ex.PW1/1. Learned counsel for the appellants stated that he is aggrieved by the judgment of the courts below where they have been directed to remove the unauthorised construction and he has no objection if the other part of the judgment restraining them to construct any further construction is retained. This stand of the appellants is to the satisfaction of the respondents that the construction which is already in existence be not removed and that further construction over the suit property be not carried out till the partition is effected. Since both the parties are agreed, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the appeal by observing that whatever construction is existing on the area in dispute shall not be disturbed and both the parties are restrained from carrying out any further construction in the areas in their possession till the time partition is effected. The decrees of the courts below is modified to that extent. The appeal stands disposed of. 28.1.2010 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE dss