R.S.A.No. 3589 of 2008 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh R.S.A.No. 3589 of 2008 Date of decision: 6.11.2009 Desa Singh ......Appellant Versus Mahla Singh and another .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. Sandeep Punchhi, Advocate, for the appellant. **** SABINA, J. Plaintiff Mahla Singh filed a suit for permanent injunction, which was dismissed by the Civil Judge (Sr.Divn.), Ferozepur vide judgment and decree dated 21.8.2007. In appeal, the said judgment and decree were set aside by the Additional District Judge, Ferozepur vide judgment and decree dated 7.3.2008. Hence, the present appeal by defendant No.1. Brief facts of the case, as noticed by the lower appellate Court in para Nos. 2 and 3 of its judgment, are as under:- “2. Plaintiff's case, in brief, is that he is in R.S.A.No. 3589 of 2008 2 cultivating possession of land measuring 3 kanals 4 marlas comprised in Killa No.12/1/1 Min situated at village Rao Ke Hithar for the last many years. The land is owned by the Provincial Government Jamabandis and khasra girdawris do contain his and his mother's name. On the other hand, the defendants have no concern, right or title over the land in question. They are threatening to dispossess him and refused to see sense. Hence, the suit. 3. The defendant No.1 contested the suit raising legal and factual objections but admitting that plaintiff is resident of village Rao Ke Hithar. He asserted that Rect. No.21 Killa No.12/1/1 Min consists of total land measuring 7 kanals 4 marlas. He is in actual and physical possession of land measuring 2 kanals 12 marlas out of Rect. No.21 Killa No.12/1 Min consists of total land measuring 7 kanals 4 marlas. He is in actual and physical possession of land measuring 2 kanals 12 marlas out of Rect. No.21 killa No.12/1 Min and land measuring 1 kanal 8 marlas towards western side out of land measuring 4 kanals 12 marlas bearing Rect. No.21 killa No.12/1 Min. His possession is recorded in the record of rights. He has no concern with the remaining land. As a matter of fact, plaintiff is not in possession of R.S.A.No. 3589 of 2008 3 any part of land measuring 7 kanals 4 marlas. He has no cause of action and therefore, his suit deserves dismissal. No written statement was filed on behalf of defendant No.2. On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed by the trial Court:- “1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to permanent injunction as prayed for? OPP 2. Whether the suit is not maintainable in its present form as alleged? OPD 3. Relief. ” After hearing learned counsel for the appellant, I am of the opinion that the present appeal deserves to be dismissed. The plaintiff had filed a suit for permanent injunction for restraining the defendants from dis-possessing him from the suit land bearing khasra No.12/1/1 Min (3-4). Admittedly, initially khasra No.12/1/1 measured 7 kanals 4 marlas and thereafter, it was bifurcated into two khasra numbers i.e. 12/1/1 Min (4-0) and 12/1/1 Min (3-4). The land was owned by the Provincial Government. It has been observed by the learned Additional District Judge in the impugned judgment that as per copy of the jamabandi for the year 2003-04 placed on record, Mahla Singh and Fauja Singh, sons of Bahadur Singh are in possession of the suit land measuring 3 kanals 4 marlas. The plaintiff was in R.S.A.No. 3589 of 2008 4 possession of land measuring 3 kanals 4 marlas of land bearing khasra No. 12/1/1 Min. The defendants are in possession of khasra No. 12/1/1 Min measuring 4 kanals. The said finding of fact arrived at by the learned Additional District Judge, after appreciating the evidence led by the parties on record, calls for no interference by this Court in appeal. The defendants have been restrained from dis- possessing the plaintiff from the suit land except in due course of law. No substantial question of law arises in this regular second appeal. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. (SABINA) JUDGE November 06, 2009 anita