IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. L.P.A. No. 1912 of 2011 ( O&M ) DATE OF DECISION : 14.10.2011 Harbans Singh .... APPELLANT Versus Emneet Singh and others ..... RESPONDENTS CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH Present: Mr. Karanjit Singh, Advocate, for the appellant. * * * SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. ( Oral ) The instant Letters Patent Appeal has been directed against the order dated 10.8.2011, passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby the writ petition (CWP No. 14501 of 2011) filed by respondent No.1 for issuing direction to respondents No.4 to 7 not to prepare the second musana (second mutation) in respect of his property till the matter is finally decided by the civil court, has been disposed of. It was the case of respondent No.1 that the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Amritsar (respondent No.4) is adamant to prepare musana/carry out mutation in favour of the appellant during the pendency of the civil suit, therefore, respondent No.4 be directed not to prepare musana/carry out LPA No. 1912 of 2011 -2- mutation in favour of the appellant. Vide the impugned order, the learned Single Judge has disposed of the writ petition, while observing that the mutation does not confer any title and if in the summary proceedings of mutation, any observation is made, the same is not binding on the civil court. However, it has been expected that the revenue authorities shall wait for the ultimate decision of the civil suit. In our opinion, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the view expressed by the learned Single Judge is the only possible and justified view. We do not find any reason to interfere in the impugned order. Dismissed. ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE October 14, 2011 ( PARAMJEET SINGH ) ndj JUDGE