RSA No. 3208 of 2009 (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No. 3208 of 2009 Date of Decision: 5.9.2009 Parkash Chand ......Appellant Versus Sat Pal 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 Rajesh Arora, Advocate, for the appellant. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (Oral). The present appellant is aggrieved against the orders of the Courts below, granting a final decree in respect of the partition of the property in dispute. The appellant has 1/9th share in the property in dispute. Shri Dev Raj Gupta, was appointed as a Local Commissioner for preparation of the final decree, to suggest the mode of partition. The present appellant did not challenge the order appointing the Local Commissioner. In the objections to the report of the Local Commissioner, there was no objection raised by the appellant that the property in dispute is not partible or that the mode of partition is not fair and/or proper. The only objection raised by the appellant was that he has made improvement worth Rs.1,50,000/- and the Local Commissioner has not assessed the value of such improvements. RSA No. 3208 of 2009 (2) Learned trial Court dismissed the objections and passed an order of preparation of a final decree on 14.12.2006. Such order has been affirmed in appeal. The learned first Appellate Court has recorded that the appellant has not raised any objection that the house in dispute is not partible or that the valuable portion has been given to respondent Nos. 1 and 2. The reasoning given by the Courts below cannot be said to be unjustified. The appellant has not raised any objection regarding the mode of partition or that the property is not partible. Therefore, it is not open to the appellant to dispute the mode of partition before the first Appellate Court or before this Court. Consequently, I do not find that the finding recorded suffers from any patent illegality or material irregularity, which may give rise to any substantial question of law in the present appeal. Hence, the present appeal is dismissed. (HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE 05-09-2009 ds