RSA No.217 of 2010 (O & M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No.217 of 2010 (O & M) Date of Decision: 11.11.2010. Sardar Khan .....Appellant Versus Lal Chand and others ……Respondents Coram:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL. Present: Mr.Jitender Nara, Advocate for the appellant. L. N. MITTAL, J (ORAL) Defendant No.2-Sardar Khan, having remained unsuccessful in both the Courts below, has filed the instant second appeal. Respondent Nos.1 and 2-plaintiffs filed suit against proforma respondent No.3-Tirlok Chand as defendant No.1 and appellant-Sardar Khan as defendant No.2 alleging that there is a public passage leading to their houses. The said passage is the only passage for their houses. Water supply line has also been laid in the said passage. Municipal Committee has also installed hand-pumps in the passage. The defendants without any right, title or interest threatened to raise construction in the said passage. Accordingly, the plaintiffs sought permanent injunction. Defendant No.1 claimed the disputed passage to be part of khasra No.448 which had fallen to his share in partition. Averments of the plaintiffs were controverted. Various other pleas were also raised. RSA No.217 of 2010 (O & M) -2- Defendant No.2-appellant claimed the disputed passage to be part of khasra No.451 measuring 5 kanals 10 marlas vesting in Haryana Wakf Board. Defendant No.2 alleged that Muslims of the town had formed Administrative Committee of which defendant No.2 is Executive Member. There is Idgah in part of khasra No.451 used by the Muslims. Defendant No.2 is residing in part of land of khasra No.451. The land of khasra No.451 was never used as passage. Various other pleas were also raised. Learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Charkhi Dadri vide judgment and decree dated 06.06.2003 decreed the plaintiff's suit. First appeal preferred by defendant No.2 stands dismissed by learned Additional District Judge, Bhiwani vide judgment and decree dated 24.01.2009. Feeling aggrieved, defendant No.2 has filed the instant second appeal. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the case file. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently contended that according to demarcation report made by Local Commissioner appointed by the trial Court, part of the disputed passage falls in khasra No.451 and there is no passage through khasra No.451. The contention cannot be accepted. There is concurrent finding by both the Courts below on the basis of appreciation of evidence that the disputed passage is being used since long by the inhabitants of the locality including the plaintiffs. Municipal Committee has laid pucca road in the disputed passage. The finding of the Courts below is based on appreciation of evidence and is supported by cogent reasons and, therefore, the same does not warrant interference in RSA No.217 of 2010 (O & M) -3- second appeal as the same cannot be said to be perverse or illegal. It has to be added that defendant No.2 appellant has no right, title or interest in land of khasra No.451 which according to own version of defendant No.2-appellant vests in Haryana Wakf Board. It is not even the case of the appellant that he has been authorized by Haryana Wakf Board to manage the land of khasra No.451. Version of defendant No.2-appellant is that he has been authorized by self styled Administrative Committee of the Muslims of the town to manage the land. However, the said Administrative Committee also has no right, title or interest in the land of khasra No.451 which vests in Haryana Wakf Board. Moroever, even resolution of the alleged Administrative Committee, said to be registered Society, has not been produced to depict that the said Committee authorized the appellant to manage the land of khasra No.451. For the reasons aforesaid, I find no merit in the instant appeal. No question of law, much less substantial question of law, arises for determination in the instant second appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed in limine. 11.11.2010. ( L. N. MITTAL ) A. Kaundal JUDGE