RSA No. 3075 of 2009 (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No. 3075 of 2009 Date of Decision: 27.8.2009 Prem ......Appellant Versus Smt. Shanti and others .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Shri Sanjay Verma, Advocate, for the appellant. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (Oral). The plaintiff is in second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the Courts below, whereby his suit for declaration challenging the consent decree dated 26.11.1983 suffered by Bharpai, mother of the plaintiff in favour of defendants i.e., daughters of Bharpai, was dismissed. Both the Courts have recorded concurrent finding of fact that Bharpai, as an absolute owner of the property was competent to enter into family settlement with her daughters and that such decree based upon such family settlement does not require registration. Concurrent findings of fact recorded by the Courts below are sought to be disputed by way of re-appreciation of evidence. It could not be pointed out that any evidence has been misread or not taken into RSA No. 3075 of 2009 (2) consideration. Consequently, I do not find any patent illegality or material irregularity in the finding recorded or that the finding recorded gives rise to any substantial question of law in the present second appeal. Hence, the present appeal is dismissed. (HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE 27.8.2009 ds