IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A.No.692 of 2009 Date of Decision : 20.08.2009 Avtar Singh and Others ...Appellants Versus Gulzar Singh 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: Mr. Ashish Mahajan, Advocate, for Mr. Anupam Bhardwaj, Advocate, for the appellants. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The plaintiffs are in second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the Courts below, whereby the suit for declaration claiming that the plaintiffs have become owner by way of adverse possession, was dismissed. The plaintiffs claimed to be in possession in pursuance of the agreement to sell dated 9.7.1980. Once the plaintiffs have entered into possession in pursuance of an agreement of sell, then the plaintiffs cannot claim to be in adverse possession. Both the Courts below have rightly found so. It may further be noticed that this Court in Bhim Singh and others Vs. Zile Singh and others 2006 (3) PLR 159, has held that the suit for declaration of title is not available, when the plaintiff claims title by way of adverse possession. In view of the above, I do not find that any substantial question of law arises for consideration of this Court. Dismissed. 20.9.2009 (HEMANT GUPTA) Vimal JUDGE