RSA No.3462 of 2006 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. RSA No.3462 of 2006 (O&M) Date of Decision: 01.07.2009 Ram Chand ...Appellant VERSUS Surinder Pal ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI Present: Mr. M. S. Rai, Advocate for the appellant. *** AJAY TEWARI J. The plaintiff has filed this appeal against concurrent judgment of the courts below whereby, in a suit for specific performance the alternate relief of refund of consideration plus penalty has been ordered. Learned counsel for the appellant has framed as many as five questions of law which are reproduced herein below:- 1. “Whether notice u/s 79 of the Cooperative Society Act was necessary before filing the present suit when the land in question is mortgage with the P.A.D. Bank or not? 2. Whether defendant no.2/respondent No.2 is protected u/s 41 of the transfer of property act or not? 3. Whether the suit is maintainable when the plaintiff/respondent is not claiming for possession of RSA No.3462 of 2006 (O&M) -2- the suit land or not? 4. Whether the alleged agreement dated 01.02.97 is forged and fabricated document or not? 5. Whether the suit filed by plaintiff/respondent is time barred or not?” As regards questions No.1 and 2, in my opinion any such plea only can be taken by the mortgagee and not by the appellant. As regards question No.3, it has to be noticed that the suit for specific performance has not been decreed, only alternate relief has been granted. As regards question No.4, it is the only question on which arguments have been addressed but the said question is a pure question of fact. It has not been shown to me that the finding arrived thereon is perverse. As regards question No.5, arguments have not been addressed. In the circumstances, this appeal is dismissed. No costs. ( AJAY TEWARI ) July 01, 2009 JUDGE ashish