R.S.A.No.533 of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A.No.533 of 2007 Date of Decision : 14.07.2009 Paras Ram ...Appellant Versus Sohan Lal and others ...Respondents CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present: Mr. Raj Mohan Singh, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Rishi Pal, Advocate, for respondent Nos.1 to 12, 14, 15 and 17. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The plaintiff is in second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the Court below, whereby suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from raising any construction on the suit property and also for possession and mandatory injunction in respect of alleged encroachment, was dismissed. The only dispute between the parties is regarding demarcation of respective property. It has been found that two Local Commissioners have given their reports Exs.P-3 and P-6 appointed at the instance of plaintiff that the property cannot be demarcated as pucca points cannot be identified. In view of the said finding, the reliance of the petitioner on the report of demarction carried out by Chajju Ram, retd. Kanungo, has been rightly not taken into consideration for various reasons as delineated by the Courts below. R.S.A.No.533 of 2007 2 Findings of fact to the effect that the property cannot be demarcated, are sought to be disputed by reappreciation of evidence in second appeal. In view of the said fact, I do not find that any substantial question of law arises for consideration by this Court in second appeal. Dismissed. 14.07.2009 (HEMANT GUPTA) Vimal JUDGE