RSA No.4530 of 2014 (O&M)

{1}

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

RSA No.4530 of 2014 (O&M)

Date of decision:02.08.2016

Satish

... Appellant

Vs.

Gram Panchayat of village Balam and another

... Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

Present:-

Mr. C.B.Goel, Advocate

for the appellant.

AMIT RAWAL J. (Oral)

The appellant-plaintiff is aggrieved of the concurrent findings

of the facts and law, whereby, suit seeking permanent injunction with regard

to the area shown by letters 'ABCD' in the site plan, Ex.P1, has been

dismissed.

Mr.C.B.Goel, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

appellant-plaintiff submits that as per the site plan, Ex.P1, the area marked

with letters 'ABCD' is being used for tethering cattle as it is not part of the

suit property, therefore, the findings rendered in the previous suit are

perverse. As noticed by the trial Court, the said findings would not be

binding upon the rights of the appellant. The trial Court has not assigned

any reasons, much less, cogent reasons in rejecting the site plan. There is

gross misreading of the evidence, much less, cross examination. In this

background of the matter, after hearing