36 1 Civil Revision No574 of 2009 m1a Itk4111 IN THE HIGHCOURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No574 of 2009 Date of decisionl 222010 MohinderSingh e etitioner 0 Versus 0 I Tarlok Singh espondent t5 CORAM HONBLE MR JUSTICE SlANAND Z Present Mr AshwaniKumarChopraSeniorAdvocatewith Mr Rajnish Chauhan Advocatefor thepetitioner MrHarsh BungerAdvocateforthe respondent SANAND J 08 The IS in revision to obtain the 1 w invalidationof the findingrecordedby the IearnedTrial Court and Z also the Iearned 1st AppellateCouit his restraint from 11 with the possession of the on the Iand Itl suit or the Iatter therefrom Both the Courts felt persuaded to allow the relevant pleafiled bythe on the basis of fact that entries have been corrected in favour of the Iattervide order dated 262007 and also the fact that Girdwari entries from Sawani 1999 to Hari 2003 and Sawano 2001 to Hari 2009 were also reflective of the possessionofthe on the Iand in suit It also weighedwith both the Courts that the AssistantCollector Ist Grade had noticed in the order dated 26 42007 that the correction was based upon the spot 121 Parkash Om 2012.12.21 16: 30 True Scanned Copy of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 37 S 1 CiviI Revision No574 of 2009 m2e 31r1kk inspection Learned Senior Counsel on behalf of the arguedthat the impugned orders can not be sustained as those are oblivous of the fact that there also was a spotinspection L report dated 1522008 to the effect that it was the defendante 0 who was in possession of the property in suit 0 I find the pleato be denuded of merit As 0 noticed by the Iearned Trial Court as also by the I Iearned Ist AppellateCourt that the spot inspectionrepondated Z 1522008 followed thefilingof an bydefendantoetitioner on 1522008 itself It was correctlynoticed Ioyboth the Couns that the reportappearedto have been obtained In a hastymanner on the cj ao verydaythe application for the purpose aforementionedwas filed 7 have not been persuadedto inteIfere in the view Z obtained by the Iearned Trial Court or the Ist AppellateCourt when the View is based upon corrected revenue entries and is not indicated to be erroneous or perverse in characte As againstit the spotinspectionreportdated 1522008 favouring the does not appear to inspiireconfidence and cannot be said to be sufficient to outweigh the material available Irl favour of the The petition is held to be denuded of merit and is ordered 9 to be dismissed April22 2010 ISDAnandl Pka Judge C Y Parkash Om 2012.12.21 16: 30 True Scanned Copy of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document