GARIB DASS Vs. GRAM PANCHAYAT VILLAGE RAMPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present regular second appeal has been filed by the appellant-plaintiff against the judgment and decree dated 11.6.2010 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Kapurthala, vide which appeal filed by the present appellant-plaintiff has been accepted and respondent -defendant- Gram Panchayat was restrained from dispossessing the appellant from the suit property illegally and forcibly except in due course of law and as a consequence thereof, suit filed by present appellantplaintiff for permanent injunction was also decreed to the extent that respondent -defendant was restrained from dispossessing the appellantplaintiff forcibly and illegally from the suit property except in due course of law.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and have gone through the whole record carefully including the impugned judgment passed by learned first appellate court. Briefly stated, the appellant- plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendant- Gram Panchayat from interfering into his possession over the property in dispute situated within the revenue estate of village Rampur, Tehsil and District Kapurthala. Suit was dismissed by learned trial court. However, on appeal being filed by the plaintiff-appellant, it was decreed to the extent that respondent- Gram Panchayat was restrained from dispossessing him forcibly and illegally except in due course of law. It has been contended by learned counsel for the appellant that his only grouse is that though the impugned order has been passed in his favour and however, respondent- Gram Panchayat intends to interfere in the possession of the appellant-plaintiff, as there is an order in favour of the respondent-Gram Panchayat passed by DDPO-cum-Collector, Kapurthala under Section 7 of the Village Common Lands Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'). However, if there is any such order passed by the competent authority in favour of the respondent-Gram Panchayat under Section 7 of the Act, the appellant should have taken the appropriate proceedings before the competent court. So far as the present suit is concerned, it was filed for permanent injunction, which was granted by learned first appellate court and the respondent- Gram Panchayat was restrained from dispossessing the appellant-plaintiff forcibly and illegally from the suit property except in due course of law. Hence, in view of these facts, it cannot be said that any illegality has been committed by learned first appellate court in passing the impugned judgment and decree. Finding recorded by learned first appellate court is fully justified by the evidence on record and is supported by cogent reasons. The said finding is not shown to be perverse or illegal nor it is based on misreading or mis-appreciation of the evidence. Hence, the said finding does not warrant interference in the second appeal. No question of law, much less substantial question of law, arises for determination in this second appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed in limine.