Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SARWAN SINGH & ORS versus FOREST RANGE OFFICER & ORS

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Sarwan Singh & Ors v. Forest Range Officer & Ors - RSA-1899-2002 [2006] RD-P&H 646 (9 February 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Case No. : R.S.A.No.1899 of 2002

Date of Decision : February 02, 2006.

Sarwan Singh and others .... Appellants

Vs.

Forest Range Officer and others .... Respondents Coram : Hon'ble Mr.Justice Viney Mittal.

* * *

Present : Mr.Ashok Khubbar, Advocate

for the appellants.

Mr.D.S.Nalwa, Senior DAG, Haryana.

JUDGMENT :

The plaintiffs having lost before the learned first appellate court, have approached this court through the present appeal.

The plaintiffs filed a suit for permanent injunction for restraining the defendants from cutting and removing the standing kikar trees, which were stated to be 12 in number. It was claimed that the said trees were standing in the land which was owned and possessed by the plaintiffs and as such, the defendants had no right to cut the said trees.

The learned trial court decreed the suit filed by the plaintiffs.

The matter was taken up in appeal by the defendants. The learned appellate court re-appraised the evidence and came to the conclusion that the demarcation report relied upon by the plaintiffs was not as per the standing instructions and therefore, could not be relied upon. Consequently, the appeal filed by the defendants was allowed and suit of the plaintiffs was dismissed.

During the pendency of the present appeal, a fresh demarcation was ordered to be conducted. A fresh demarcation report submitted by Naib Tehsildar, Radaur dated December 12, 2005 is available on the record of this Court. A perusal of the aforesaid report shows that it has been reported that only two dried up trees are standing in Khasra No.36/22/1/1 and Khasra No.36/22/1/2 and there were no other trees available on the said land.

R.S.A.No.1899 of 2002 : 2 :

In view of the aforesaid report, submitted by the Naib Tehsildar, Radaur, there is no scope of any interference in the present appeal.

Nothing has been shown that the findings recorded by the learned first appellate court suffer from any infirmity or are contrary to the record.

No question of law, much less any substantial question of law, arises in the present appeal.

Dismissed.

February 02, 2006 ( VINEY MITTAL )

monika JUDGE


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.