IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJATHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. ORDER S.B. CIVIL SECOND APPEAL NO.69/2007 Ghanshyam & Anr. Vs. Durga Lal & Ors. 18.01.2008. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DALIP SINGH Shri Praveen Jain, for the appellant. Shri Ajay Shukla, for the respondent. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The dispute is in respect of the way which has been given to the plaintiff appellant in the Patta issued to him by the Panchayat on 1.11.1985 which is towards the South. The issuance of the Patta to the plaintiff appellant is not in dispute. The dispute is whether the plaintiff is entitled to claim the right of way on the basis of the aforesaid Patta which is Ex.4 on record. It is contended that towards the South in the boundaries which has been mentioned in Ex.4 it is mentioned as “Parat Jamin Panchayat aivam Nikas......” but the learned courts below have declined to grant the relief to the plaintiff appellant on account of proceedings of the Gram Panchayat dated 14.11.1988 to which the appellant was not a party wherein the Gram Panchayat has given a finding that towards the South there is a Bara of the defendant Durga Lal. The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the learned lower appellate court in its judgment dated 16.3.2005 at page 12 of the certified copy of the judgment while deciding issue No.2 has held that the decision given by the Gram Panchayat dated 14.11.1988 is not in accordance with the procedure prescribed but since the same has not been challenged by the plaintiff appellant no relief can be granted to the plaintiff appellant. So far as the judgment of the learned lower appellate court is concerned it is admitted that no appeal or revision was filed against the decision of the Gram Panchayat dated 14.11.1988 by the appellants as the appellants were not party to the same and they had no notice of the said proceedings. It is stated that the plaintiff was prevented from filing the appeal as the plaintiff had no knowledge about the same and the same was produced before the court by the respondent and it is only at that point of time that the plaintiff appellant came to know about the said decision which as per the case of the appellants was void. Be that as it may in the facts and circumstances I am not inclined to interfere with the judgment and decree passed by the courts below. The plaintiff if so advised may challenge the decision of the Gram Panchayat in accordance with law seeking condonation of delay in accordance with law. This second appeal as well as the stay application are accordingly disposed of. (DALIP SINGH),J. Ramchandrkhatri,PS