Punjab-Haryana High Court
State Of Haryana & Ors vs Raghubir Singh & Ors on 15 April, 2009
Regular Second Appeal No. 1490 of 2009 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Regular Second Appeal No. 1490 of 2009
Date of Decision: 15.4.2009
***
State of Haryana & Ors.
.. Appellants
VS.
Raghubir Singh & Ors.
.. Respondents.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR,
Present:- Mr. Ajay Gulati, AAG Haryana.
***
ARVIND KUMAR, J.
The State of Haryana and others-defendants have preferred the instant regular second appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908(for brevity 'the Code'), challenging concurrent findings recorded by both the Courts below restraining them from raising any construction upon the suit land.
Having heard the learned counsel, I am of the considered view that no question of law warranting admission of appeal would arise. The existence of school building on some part of the land of the plaintiffs is not in dispute and also has a reflection in the revenue record. The plaintiff sought injunction by perpetually restraining the defendants from raising any sort of construction on remaining part of their land, except the land underneath the school building. The plea of the defendants of their having received whole of the land in donation by the predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiffs and in possession thereof, was not proved by them since no writing, which, as per admission of defendants' own witnesses i.e. DW.1 and DW.2, was duly made, was produced on record. Furthermore, no revenue record or mutation entered in their favour subsequent to the alleged donation was produced on record. Thus, their plea of donation of whole of Regular Second Appeal No. 1490 of 2009 2 the land was turned down and while relying upon the entries in revenue record and the report of Local Commissioner (Ex.PW5/3), both the Courts below concurrently held the plaintiffs in possession of the suit land measuring 4 kanals only, except the land underneath the school building, admittedly in possession of the defendants and rightly restrained the defendants from raising any sort of construction thereupon. There are concurrent findings of fact recorded by both the Courts below. The findings are based on cogent evidence, oral as well as documentary, and it cannot be concluded that the findings are laconic or they lack the support of evidence. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed in limine.
(ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE April 15,2009 Jiten