RSA No.3793 of 1987(O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No.3793 of 1987 (O&M) Date of decision: 20.5.2010 Juma Khan ............Appellant Versus Hazura Singh and another .......... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH -.- Present: Mr. Amarjit Markan, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Sarwan Singh, Sr. Advocate with Mr. N.S. Rapri, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2. 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? ALOK SINGH, J. (ORAL) 1. Brief facts of the present case are that plaintiff/respondent had filed a suit for mandatory injunction to direct the defendant/appellant to restore Pahi/Rasta comprising of Khasra No.1194(08-6B) of the dimensions given in the heading of the plaint, encroached upon by the defendant/appellant and for injunction to restrain him from raising any construction thereon or raising any permanent structure; finally the suit of the plaintiff/respondent was RSA No.3793 of 1987(O&M) -2- dismissed by the learned trial Court; however, learned first Appellate Court, after examining every evidence on record, came to the conclusion that there is no access to the land of the plaintiff/respondent except from the Pahi in question, hence, Pahi must be restored; Learned First Appellate Court vide impugned judgment and decree dated 21.10.1987 allowed the appeal and decreed the suit filed by the plaintiff/respondent; present second appeal is preferred by the defendant/appellant assailing the judgment and decree dated 21.10.1987 passed by the first Appellate Court. 2. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. Having perused the judgment, I find that the impugned judgment is based upon the question of fact. As to whether there was Pahi/Rasta over the property in dispute is a simplicitor question of fact which has already been replied by learned first Appellate Court. No substantial question of law is involved in the present appeal. Since, no substantial question of law arises for consideration which is sine qua non to maintain the present appeal under Section 100 C.P.C., hence, present appeal is liable to be dismissed. 4. The appeal is devoid of merit, and the same is dismissed, with no order as to costs. ( ALOK SINGH ) 20th May, 2010 JUDGE ashish