IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No.2564 of 2008 Date of decision:01.12.2008 Hakam Singh .... Appellant versus Natha Singh & others .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI Present: Mr. Malkeet Singh, Advocate for the appellant. **** 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers 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? **** AJAY TEWARI, J.(ORAL) This appeal has been filed against the judgments and decrees of the Courts below dismissing the suit filed by the appellant challenging the sale deed made by his father on the ground that there was no legal necessity to make such a deed. Both the Courts below found that the amount obtained by selling the land was used for payment of the loan taken by the firm consisting of the said father, one of his sons and that son's wife, in respect of which a suit for recovery was instituted by the Bank. It has also been found that the father of the appellant had borrowed another amount which was also paid off by this sale deed. In this view of the matter, the Courts below hold that the property was sold for legal necessity and consequently dismissed the suit. Learned counsel for the appellant has sought to argue that since all the co-sharers were not partners in the brick kiln, the sale of their shares RSA No.2564 of 2008 -2- could not have been made. He has further argued that the Courts below have returned a wrong finding that the brick kiln was a family business. Learned counsel for the appellant has not been able to persuade this Court that these findings are either perverse or that they cannot be held to arise from the material before the Courts below. Consequently, I find no merit in this appeal. I hold that the proposed questions of law do not arise and dismiss the same. No costs. December 01, 2008 (AJAY TEWARI) sonia JUDGE