IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No. 3631 of 2007 Date of decision : February 13, 2008 Geeta Ram ....Appellant versus Hari Ram and others ....Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pritam Pal Present : Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate for the appellant Pritam Pal,J. (Oral) This regular second appeal by defendant is directed against the judgment and decree dated 9.4.2004 passed by the learned trial court whereby suit for legal partition of the land of the parties was decreed. Thereafter appeal filed by the defendant was also dismissed by learned Additional District Judge, Jind vide judgment and decree dated 12.9.2007 This is how feeling aggrieved, the defendant-appellant has come up in this appeal. The only noticeable point of argument raised on behalf of the appellant is that in this case all the necessary parties were not joined and that a partial partition has been allowed to take place. After hearing the learned counsel for the appellant and going through the record, I find that both the aforesaid contentions raised by the learned counsel for the appellant merit no credence inasmuch as there are RSA No. 3631 of 2007 -2- concurrent findings of the courts below that all the necessary parties/co- sharers were joined while filing the suit and that no property is shown to have been left out from the partition. More-so, in this case, learned counsel for the appellant could not make out any substantial question of law for consideration by this Court. Dismissed in limine. ( Pritam Pal ) February 13, 2008 Judge 'dalbir'