RSA 1453 of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No. 1453 of 2007 Date of Decision: 05.11. 2008 Jagmal ...... Appellant Versus Sant Kumar and others ...... Respondents 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.Rajesh Khandelwal, Advocate for the appellant. **** Ajay Tewari, J. This appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 20.3.2007 passed by the District Judge, Narnaul allowing the appeal filed by the respondent and consequently decreeing his suit for permanent injunction restraining the appellant from interfering in the possession of the property. The learned lower Appellate Court primarily relied upon the admission of the appellant to the effect that his father and uncle were brothers and co-owners, that his uncle died issueless and that after him the widow of the uncle Smt. Chandro became the owner of the share of the uncle, and that Smt.Chandro had bequeathed the entire land which she had RSA 1453 of 2007 2 inherited from his uncle in favour of her nephew Rudha Ram, father of the respondent. On the basis of this admission the learned lower Appellate Court held that the commission of the respondent in leading positive evidence to prove his ownership was not a fatal commission. In my opinion no fault can be found with the reasoning adopted by the learned lower Appellate Court. Counsel for the appellant has not been able to show that even though the agricultural land was transferred to Rudha Ram yet the share in the house in the property was transferred to him. Thus it has to be held that Chandro had transferred her entire interest in the property to Rudha Ram. That being so I hold that the questions proposed do not arise in this appeal. Consequently the same is dismissed. No costs. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE November 05, 2008 sunita