RSA No.1452 of 2010 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh RSA No. 1452 of 2010 Date of decision: 03.02.2011 Sukhbir Kaur .....Appellant Versus Malook Singh and another .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.Rajiv Joshi, Advocate, for the appellant **** SABINA, J. Plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction. The case of the plaintiff in brief was that she was in continuance possession of the suit land since the year 1994 on the basis of a compromise-cum-agreement between her and defendant No.1. Defendant No. 2 was intending to take forcible possession of the suit land with defendant No.1. Hence, the suit was filed. Defendant No.1 was proceeded ex-parte. Defendant No.2 in his written statement denied the contents in the plaint. On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were RSA No.1452 of 2010 2 framed by the trial Court:- "1.Whether the plaintiff is entitled for permanent injunction as prayed for?OPP 2.Whether the defendants are taking the forcible possession of the suit land?OPD 3.Whether plaintiff has no locus standi t file the present suit?OPD 4.Whether the suit is not maintainable in the present form?OPD 5.Whether plaintiff is estopped by her act and conduct?OPD 6.Relief." Vide judgment and decree dated 11.6.2007,the trial Court dismissed the suit filed by the plaintiff. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, plaintiff preferred an appeal and the same was dismissed by the Additional District Judge, Jalandhar vide judgment and decree dated 16.9.2009. Hence, the present appeal by the plaintiff. After hearing the learned counsel for the appellant, I am of the opinion that the present appeal deserves dismissal. Admittedly, the suit property is owned by Provincial Government. As per the copy of the jamabandi for the year 1996- 97, Exhibit P2, plaintiff is described to be in possession of the suit property. As per Exhibit P3, copy of the khasra girdawari from the year 1997 till October 1999, plaintiff is described to be in possession of the suit property. As per Exhibit P4, copy of the entries in the khasra girdawari from October, 1997 to March, 2002, plaintiff is described to be in possession of the suit property till March, 2003. Thereafter, an entry qua possession is described in RSA No.1452 of 2010 3 the name of Gulshan Lal. Admittedly, the plaintiff had challenged the said change of entry in the khasra girdawari in the name of Gulshan Lal and the said application moved by the plaintiff was dismissed by the Assistant Collector Ist Grade Phillaur. The appeal filed by the plaintiff was dismissed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate-cum- Collector Phillaur vide order dated 23.12.2005. It has transpired, during the course of arguments, that Gulshan Lal had taken possession of the suit property after the filing of the suit. The plaintiff had, however, failed to amend the suit and claim possession. In these circumstances, the Courts below had rightly dismissed the suit of the plaintiff. No substantial question of law arises for consideration. Dismissed. ( Sabina ) Judge February 03, 2011 arya