Civil Revision No. 6949 of 2010 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Civil Revision No. 6949 of 2010 Date of Decision: 26.10.2010 Dinesh Mohan …Petitioner Versus Sudesh Pal Jain and Another …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr. P.K. Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) Mr. Sanjeev Pandit, Advocate, appearing for the caveator/respondent No.1 has placed on record a carbon copy of the proceedings pertaining to Execution No. 65 of 2010 and has stated at bar that the landlord has taken possession of the demised premises on 20.10.2010. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in this context, has submitted that it may be a difficult task to dislodge the ground of personal necessity, as recorded by both the Courts below. I have perused the judgments of both the Courts below. They have rightly found no merit in the contention of the petitioner/tenant that the family settlement was a sham transaction. Considering the fact that the landlord has taken over the possession of the demised premises and the Revisional Court cannot Civil Revision No. 6949 of 2010 2 tread on the path of re-appraisal and re-appreciation of the evidence, this Court finds no merit to cause interference in the present petition. Hence, the present revision petition is hereby dismissed, in limine. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge October 26, 2010 “DK”