28.3.2008. Present: Mr.Sanjeev Kuthiala, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr.H.K.Bhardwaj, Advocate for the Respondent. C. Rev. No. 11/2008. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the statement of Shri Kalyan Singh recorded at the time of demarcation, pursuant to the consent order, was not considered and in the impugned order it is has been wrongly observed that “Kalyan Singh has not mentioned anything with regard to the mango tree”. In my view whether Kalyan Singh had also made a mention about the mango tree in his statement before the Settlement Officer would make no difference as the statement made by Smt. Saroj Devi was specifically not disputed by him and further the matter was decided on the basis that the courts below had concurrently rejected the claim of the appellant with regard to the mango tree. In my view, no ground for interference is made out. The application is accordingly rejected. CMP.No. 176/2008 In view of the dismissal of the main petition, this application is also dismissed. (Sanjay Karol),J. March 28, 2008(R)