IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A. No. 4139 of 2011(O&M) Date of Decision: 18.10.2011 Jai Singh .... Appellant Versus The Estate Officer, Station Headquarter, Ambala Cantt. ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present : Mr. J.S. Cooner, Advocate for the appellant 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? RITU BAHRI J. (ORAL) This Regular Second Appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 1.12.2010 passed by learned Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) Ambala and judgment and decree dated 16.8.2011 passed by learned Addl. District Judge, Ambala. Plaitniff had filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendant - Estate Officer, Station Headquarter, Ambala Cantt. from demolishing the Atta Chakki and Pucca rooms detailed and described in the head-note of the plaint, situated within the revenue estate of village Machhaunda, Tehsil and District Ambala. The trial Court has dismissed the suit of the plaintiff as being barred by principle of res-judicata under Section 11 C.P.C. The plaintiff had earlier alongwith Fateh Singh filed a suit for using R.S.A. No. 4139 of 2011(O&M) 2 the property in dispute which was dismissed by the Court of Shri N.K. Singhal, the then Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) Amabala vide judgment and decree dated 5.2.2005. The appeal filed against the said judgment was also dismissed by the Court of Shri A.K. Verma, the then Addl. District Judge, Amabala vide judgment and decree dated 21.7.2006. Fateh Singh alongwith one Sumer Chand filed suit which was also dismissed on 5.6.2002 by the Court of Shri Jaibir Singh the then learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.) Amabala. The trial Court dismissed the suit as the matter in issue has already been decided by the competent Court of law directly vide judgment and decrees Ex. D7 to Ex. D10 between the same parties. This fact has been admitted by the appellant while appearing as PW-4 in appeal. The lower Appellate Court has observed that plaintiff has admitted while appearing as PW-4 that he had filed an earlier suit and the said suit was dismissed vide judgment and decree Ex.D7 and Ex.D8 dated 5.2.2005. The lower Appellate court has dismissed the appeal following the law laid down in M.S.M. Sharma vs. Shri Krishna Sinha, AIR 1960 SC 1185. No substantial question of law arises for adjudication by this Court as contemplated under Section 100 C.P.C. for admission of this appeal. Appeal is dismissed. (RITU BAHRI) 18.10.2011 JUDGE reena