1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No. 4085 of 2011 Date of Decision: 2.11.2011 *** Sunil and Ors. .. Appellants VS. Mewa Devi & Ors. .. Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR, Present:- Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate for the appellants. *** ARVIND KUMAR, J. The instant regular second appeal has been preferred against the final judgment and decree dated 16.2.2009, as affirmed by the appellate Court below vide judgment dated 31.5.2011. Heard. It is apparent that a suit for possession by way of partition was filed by Darshan and others. The said suit was decreed on 4.1.2000 and a preliminary decree was passed therein. Thereafter, the decree holder filed an application for appointment of local commissioner to visit on the spot and to suggest the mode of partition as per share, value and kind of land. Consequently, the Court appointed Sh. S.S. Joon, Advocate as local commissioner, who visited the spot and submitted his report, thereby proposed the mode of partition. The learned trial Court, while relying upon the report of local commissioner, dismissed the objections filed thereto only by Narender, Satibir and Ishwar Singh and consequently passed the final decree. The report of local commission was ordered to be made part of the decree sheet. Dis-satisfied with the same, an appeal was preferred, but the same was dismissed by the appellate Court vide judgment dated 31.5.2011. Still aggrieved, the appellants have preferred the instant regular second appeal. 2 It emerges out from the records that the appellants never filed any objection to the report submitted by the local commissioner, suggesting the mode of partition, rather they tried to agitate the issue which was already settled by virtue of the preliminary decree. There was no dispute with regard to the shares of the parties and in this view of the matter, the Courts below rightly relied upon the report of the local commissioner, which was found without any ambiguity, and ordered for partition of the suit property by metes and bounds. There is no merit in the instant petition, which is accordingly dismissed in limine. (ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE November 02,2011 Jiten