R.S.A.No. 2742 of 2010(O&M) 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh R.S.A.No. 2742 of 2010(O&M) Date of decision: 3.6.2011 Hirdey Singh ......Appellant Versus Rajesh Devi and others .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.Manish Soni, Advocate for Mr.S.S.Dinarpur, Advocate, for the appellant. **** SABINA, J. Plaintiff had filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction. The case of the plaintiff, in brief, was that the plaintiff was in possession of plot bearing No.1118 measuring 400 square yards after its purchase vide registered sale deed dated 21.3.2002. The plot No.1117 was ancestral property of the plaintiff and the plaintiff had constructed residential house thereon. The plot bearing No.1118 was being used as courtyard. The defendants were threatening to dispossess the plaintiff from the suit land. R.S.A.No. 2742 of 2010(O&M) 2 Defendants, in their written statement, averred that they were owners in possession of the suit property on the basis of registered sale deed dated 5.12.1983. The plaintiff was neither owner nor in possession of the suit property. On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed by the trial Court:- “1. Whether the plaintiff is owner in possession of plot bearing No.1118 vide registered sale deed dated 21.3.2002? OPP. 2. Whether the plaintiff is in possession of plot No.1117 being his ancestral property ? OPP 3. Whether the sale deed dated 21.3.2002 is forged and fictitious ? OPD 4.Whether the suit of the plaintiff is false and frivolous? OPD 5. Whether the defendants are in possession of property in question vide sale deed dated 5.12.1983 ? OPD 6. Whether the suit of the plaintiff is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties ? OPD 7. Whether plaintiff has no cause of action to file the present suit ? OPD 8. Whether the plaintiff is estopped from filing the present suit by his own act and conduct ? OPD 9. Whether the plaintiff has no locus standi to file the present suit ? OPD 10. Relief.” The trial Court dismissed the suit of the plaintiff vide R.S.A.No. 2742 of 2010(O&M) 3 judgment and decree dated 31.8.2009. Appeal filed by the plaintiff against the said judgment and decree was also dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 22.2.2010 passed by the Additional District Judge. Hence, the present appeal by the plaintiff. After hearing learned counsel for the appellant, I am of the opinion that the present appeal is devoid of any merit and deserves dismissal. In the present case, the plaintiff had filed the suit for declaration and permanent injunction basing his claim on sale deed dated 21.3.2002. On the other hand, the defendants averred that they had purchased the suit property vide sale deed dated 5.12.1983. Since the defendants had purchased the suit property bearing No.1118 much before the sale deed executed in favour of the plaintiff, the suit filed by the plaintiff was liable to fail. No substantial question of law arises in this regular second appeal, which would warrant interference by this Court. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. (SABINA) JUDGE June 03, 2011 anita