RSA No. 3123 of 2006 (1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
RSA No. 3123 of 2006
Date of Decision: 28.8.2009
Surjit Singh ......Appellant
Versus
Ujaggar Singh .......Respondent
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA.
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
Present: Shri S.S. Tiwana, Advocate, for the appellant.
Shri Arun Jindal, Advocate, for the respondents.
HEMANT GUPTA, J. (Oral).
The plaintiff is in second appeal aggrieved against the
judgment and decree passed by the Courts below, whereby his suit for
possession has been dismissed.
The plaintiff filed a suit for possession claiming 1/4th share in
the land measuring 31 bighas 4 biswas. The suit property was put to sale by
way of an auction on 21.8.1977 on account of non payment of arrears of
maintenance awarded to the wife of the appellant. The sale certificate in
pursuance of the sale confirmed in favour of the defendant was issued on
24.6.1988. It is, thus, contended that sale certificate issued on 24.6.1988
will not confer any title in favour of the defendant.
Both the Courts have dismissed the suit holding that the sale of
RSA No. 3123 of 2006 (2)
the property conducted in execution of an order granting maintenance
having been confirmed, cannot be disputed only for the reason that sale
certificate was issued after a long time.
It has been noticed that earlier in the proceedings, the High
Court has dismissed the revision petition on 5.10.1990 (Ex. D.15) against
the order passed by the learned trial Court by which application to cancel
the sale certificate was declined. In view of the said fact, the present suit for
possession was dismissed.
I do not find any patent illegality or material irregularity in the
finding recorded or that the finding recorded gives rise to any substantial
question of law in the present second appeal. Hence, the present appeal is
dismissed.
(HEMANT GUPTA)
JUDGE
28.8.2009
ds