BALBIR SINGH Vs. SANTA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the appellant has argued that in paragraph 14 of the judgment of learned first appellate court, it has been noticed that the earlier suit filed by the plaintiff had been decreed for permanent injunction vide judgment and decree dated August 26, 1994 and that if the defendants were threatening to dispossess the plaintiff from the suit land, then he had a remedy of filing of an application for execution of the aforesaid decree. In these circumstances, the learned counsel says that the present appeal may be disposed of as having not pressed with a liberty to the plaintiff-appellant to take appropriate proceedings in terms of the aforesaid observation as made by the learned first appellate court. In view of the stand taken by the learned counsel for the appellant, the present appeal is disposed of as not pressed with a liberty to the plaintiff-appellant to seek appropriate remedy for enforcing his rights in terms of the decree dated August 26, 1994. The present appeal is, thus, disposed of.