IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. RSA No. 4218 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 24.5.2011 Krishan petitioner vs Babu Ram and others respondent Present:- Mr. Radhe Shyam Sharma, Advocate. M.M.S.BEDI This appeal has been filed by Krishan, who had filed a suit against Babu Ram and others- respondents. A suit had also been filed by Babu Ram against appellant-Krishan for injunction regarding the controversy whether there exists a rasta on khasra No. 10//21 on the southern side and 11//25 on the eastern side and 33//5 on the eastern side from the time of consolidation and on 33/6/1/ on the eastern Doli by prescription or through easement. The courts below have arrived at a conclusion that the appellant as a neighbour of the respondents was allowed to visit his fields as a gesture of good will when there was no crop in the fields of the defendant- respondents and that he had not acquired any right of easement by prescription. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the courts below have not fairly appreciated the evidence produced on the record. After hearing learned counsel for the appellant and going through the judgments of the courts below, I am of the opinion that a concurrent finding of fact has been arrived at by the courts below that the appellant had not acquired any right of easement on killa No.33/6/1/ for the passage measuring 2 karams in width. No ground is made out for interference as no substantial question of law is involved. Dismissed. May 24 , 2011 (M.M.S.BEDI ) TSM JUDGE