IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Regular Second Appeal No.1270 of 2001 (O&M) Date of decision: 10th August, 2011 Kanwar Singh and others … Appellants Versus Sher Singh … Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Sanjay Mittal, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Ashok Gupta, Advocate for the respondent. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Present regular second appeal has been filed by plaintiffs to the suit. They had instituted a suit for declaration to the effect that they have become owners in possession of the property, details and description whereof have been given in the plaint, by way of adverse possession. It was pleaded in the suit that the respondent-defendant had executed an agreement to sell in respect of the suit land. The respondent-defendant had also filed a counter claim. The trial Court dismissed the suit for declaration, whereas the counter claim was decreed against the appellants-plaintiffs. A decree for possession of the suit land in favour of the respondent-defendant was passed and he was directed to return the amount of Rs.13,000/- to the appellants-plaintiffs within a period of two months. The appeal filed by the appellants- Regular Second Appeal No.1270 of 2001 (O&M) plaintiffs was also dismissed. Hence, the present regular second appeal has been filed. Mr. Sanjay Mittal, Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants-plaintiffs, states that the legal representatives of respondent- defendant have executed a sale deed in favour of the appellants- plaintiffs. Mr.Mittal has placed on record a duly attested photostat copy of the sale deed. It is further stated that on the basis of that sale deed, mutation has also been sanctioned in favour of the appellants-plaintiffs and their family members. A duly attested photostat copy of the mutation has also been placed on record. Both, the attested copies of sale deed as well as the mutation are taken on record as Ex.A1 and Ex.A2 respectively. Mr. Ashok Gupta, Advocate for the respondent-defendant, has not denied execution of the sale deed and sanction of the mutation. Mr. Mittal and Mr. Gupta have made a joint statement that in view of execution of the sale deed Ex.A1 and sanction of the mutation Ex.A2, the present appeal has been rendered infructuous and the same be disposed of as such. Ordered accordingly. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE August 10, 2011 rps 2