State Of Haryana And Others vs Bakshish Singh on 1 March, 2009

0
130
Punjab-Haryana High Court
State Of Haryana And Others vs Bakshish Singh on 1 March, 2009
Regular Second Appeal No. 4130 of 2008                    1

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH

                   Regular Second Appeal No. 4130 of 2008 (O&M)
                   Date of Decision: 1.4.2009
                                     ***

State of Haryana and others
                                                        ..APPELLANTS

             VS.


Bakshish Singh
                                                        ..RESPONDENT


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR,

Present:-    Mr. Ajay Gulati, AAG Haryana.
             ***

ARVIND KUMAR, J.

After having lost concurrently before two of the Courts below,
the State of Haryana and others have preferred the instant Regular Second
Appeal.

The suit of the plaintiff-respondent for declaration, challenging
the entries made in favour of the State of Haryana vide mutation No. 1014
dated 30.1.1990, after deleting the name of the plaintiff, in respect of the
suit land, which at one point of time was declared as surplus, was decreed
by the learned trial court as the appellant-defendant not only admitted the
possession of the respondent-plaintiff over the suit land till date but also the
factum of pendency of writ petition of the plaintiff before this Court
challenging the order of the Prescribed Authority, including the suit land in
the surplus zone, wherein his dispossession has been stayed by directing
the parties to maintain status quo in respect of the suit land. Thus, the courts
below rightly concluded that the entries made in favour of Haryana State in
place of plaintiff, as owner in possession of the suit land are totally illegal
and accordingly rightly ordered for incorporation of the name of the
plaintiff in the revenue record till he remains in possession thereof. No
Regular Second Appeal No. 4130 of 2008 2

ground is made out to interfere with the concurrent findings of fact recorded
by both the Courts below. No substantial question of law, which is sine qua
non for admission of appeal is made out. The appeal is wholly without
merits and the same is accordingly dismissed in limine.

(ARVIND KUMAR)
JUDGE
April 1,2009
Jiten

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *