RSA No.2802 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No.2802 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 26.05.2011 Kishan Singh ....Appellant Versus Joginder Singh ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S BEDI 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: - Rakesh Kumar, Advocate, for the appellant. ***** M.M.S. BEDI, J (ORAL) Sum of ` 10,000/- has not been deposited as per the direction of this Court, however, counsel for the appellant submits that defendant/appellant be heard on merits. Suit of the plaintiff/respondent, real brother of the defendant/appellant, for possession of 3 marlas land comprised in khasra numbers mentioned in heading of the plaint, has been decreed by the Courts below. Plaintiff/respondent had claimed possession of the plot measuring 3 marlas on the basis of sale deed dated 25.3.2003 and the mutation, which had been entered on 2.11.2003. The defendant/appellant claimed that he had been in possession of the property for the last 35 years and that the sale deed in favour of plaintiff/respondent is without consideration. Plaintiff has proved the sale deed Ex.P-6 dated 26.3.2003 by producing Registration Clerk and RSA No.2802 of 2010 (O&M) -2- other witnesses. Both the Courts below have held that the plaintiff/respondent has got a better possessory title and that the defendant/appellant has got no right to retain the possession of the property in dispute. No ground is made out for interference in the concurrent findings arrived at by the Courts below. Counsel for the appellant has contended that plaintiff/respondent is not interested in the property and he is not even residing in village Baghana, Tehsil Phagwara, District Kapurthala, but residing in Hoshiarpur. Counsel for the appellant has further submitted that defendant/appellant had acquired ownership in 3 marlas of land in dispute on the basis of exchange deed entered into between the plaintiff and Bhagat Ram, uncle of the defendant/appellant. No such plea was specifically taken or proved by producing any exchange deed, as such I do not find any force in said contention. Dismissed. (M.M.S. Bedi) Judge May 26, 2011 R.S.