Regular Second Appeal No.4336 of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Regular Second Appeal No.4336 of 2008 Date of decision: September 11, 2009 Mohinder Singh and another .....APPELLANTS VERSUS Gram Panchayat, Tangoli .....RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.P.S.MANN PRESENT: Mr B.R.Gupta, Advocate T.P.S.MANN, J. (Oral): Suit filed by the appellants for permanent injunction, was dismissed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Pehowa on 19.4.2008. It was followed by filing of first appeal by the appellants, which was partly accepted by learned Additional District Judge, Kurukshetra on 4.6.2008, whereby the respondent-Gram Panchayat was directed not to lease 50% of the suit land for cultivation purposes and to keep the same for the original purpose for grazing of the cattle owned by the villagers, for the reason that the suit land had originally been reserved for gau charand. The appellants then filed the present second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. On May 26, 2009 when the appeal was taken up for motion hearing, it was contended on behalf of the appellants that though there was reference on page 22 of the paper book i.e. para-1 of the judgment passed by the learned appellate Court that a compromise had been effected between the parties, yet there was no such compromise and, therefore, the findings were erroneous. In view of the same, the records were requisitioned. The records have since been received and the statement made by the learned counsel representing the Gram Panchayat, as well as both the appellants Regular Second Appeal No.4336 of 2008 -2- appear on page 43 of the appeal records. In his statement made before the learned lower appellate Court, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Gram Panchayat stated that the Gram Panchayat shall not use 50% of the suit land for the agricultural purposes and shall leave this land for the purpose of grazing of cattle owned by the villagers of Tangoli and shall not use it for other purposes other than (grazing of the cattle) as the land was gau charand. The remaining 50% of the suit land shall be used by the Gram Panchayat, Tangoli as per the procedure laid down under the law. Pursuant thereto, both the appellants also made a joint statement on 4.6.2008 which reads as under: “Stated that as per the statement of the learned counsel for the respondent, since 50% of the suit land shall be left for the purposes of grazing of the cattle owned by the villagers and shall not use for other purposes other than charand (grazing of the cattle) as the land is gau charand, I withdraw this appeal and same may be disposed of being partly accepted.” In view of the fact that the first appeal filed by the appellants had been withdrawn in view of the statement made on behalf of the respondent-Gram Panchayat to the extent, the Gram Panchayat had undertaken not to use 50% of the suit land for agricultural purposes and to leave the same for the purpose of grazing of cattle owned by the villagers of Tangoli and for no other purpose, there is no merit in the present appeal, which is, therefore, dismissed. (T.P.S.MANN) September 11, 2009 JUDGE Pds. Regular Second Appeal No.4336 of 2008 -3-