IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No. 3482 of 2008 Date of Decision: 04.11. 2008 Gurdev Kaur ...... Appellant Versus Joginder Singh ...... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Tewari 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr.B.D.Sharma, Advocate for the appellant. **** Ajay Tewari, J. Learned counsel for the appellant asserts that while recording the findings in para 15 to the effect that no document was placed on the record which would evidence the position of Khasra No. 59/1, the learned lower Appellate Court did not consider Ex.D6 which was the mutation entered into consequent to the order dated 15.11.94. He, however, is not in a position to deny that the said order dated 15.11.94 was subsequently set aside and that those consolidation proceedings which have given rise to the claim of the appellant to a newly carved out Khasra No. 59/1 have not yet been finalised. Even the reliance on the Aks shajra mark A which is now pleaded by learned counsel for the appellant would be of no avail. It has to be kept in mind that the whole case of the appellant is that as a result of an RSA No. 3482 of 2008 -2- application the Consolidation Officer had carved out a new Khasra No. 59/1 which was in the ownership of the appellant. Those proceedings having not yet fructified it cannot be held that this particular piece of land which is now claimed by the appellant was in her exclusive possession. The findings of the Courts below regarding possession are findings of fact and the same have not been shown to me to be either perverse or not arising from the evidence on the record of the case. Consequently this appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE November 04, 2008 sunita