Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 3839 P&H
Judgement Date : 12 April, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:054920
CM-3542-C-2023 in/&
RSA-921-2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CM-3542-C-2023 in/&
RSA-921-2023
Date of Decision :12.04.2023
Rajpal and others ..Appellants
Versus
Lakshmi Narain and others ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI
Present: Mr. R.A. Sheoran, Advocate for the appellants.
***
Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral)
In the present regular second appeal, the challenge is to
judgment and decree dated 22.08.2016 passed by the trial Court by which,
the suit filed by the respondents-plaintiffs for partition was allowed and the
respondents-plaintiffs were held entitled for 08 marlas of land as per
preliminary decree as well as to the judgment and decree dated 23.12.2022
passed by the lower Appellate Court by which, the appeal filed by the
present appellants challenging the judgment and the preliminary decree of
the trial Court dated 22.08.2016, has been dismissed.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that while
adjudicating the entitlement of the land in question qua the respondents-
plaintiffs, 08 marlas land has been given and that too without deciding the
issue with regard to the proportionate cut in respect of the street on the land
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:054920
CM-3542-C-2023 in/& RSA-921-2023
in question.
It may be noticed that in the regular second appeal, only the
question of perversity is to be seen in the orders passed by the Courts
below. It is a conceded position that present appellants did not participate in
the partition proceedings and were proceeded exparte and after the passing
of preliminary decree, mode of partition suggested by the Local
Commissioner in his report dated 05.11.2015 was accepted by the Court
below. All the aspects required to be taken into consideration including the
argument raised qua the grant of valuable land in favour of the respondents-
plaintiffs has been taken into consideration by the Courts below and decided
in accordance with law. All the arguments raised, have been dealt with on
the basis of the evidence, which had come on record and no perversity could
be pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellants.
Further, the appellants had liberty to challenge the objections to
the partition proceedings by participating in the same but they chose not to
avail the said remedy and were proceeded exparte. The said order of
proceeding the appellants exparte was never challenged by them hence,
once, a preliminary decree has already been framed and mode of partition
has been suggested by the local Commissioner, in the regular second
appeal, no grievance can be raised by the appellants. Once, the appellants
did not avail the liberty to raise all the objections at the appropriate stage,
the same cannot be raised now in the present regular second appeal.
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances noticed
hereinbefore as no perversity has been pointed out by the learned counsel
for the appellants in the findings recorded by the Courts below, no
interference is called for by this Court and the present regular second appeal
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:054920
CM-3542-C-2023 in/& RSA-921-2023
is accordingly dismissed.
CM-3542-C-2023
Application is also dismissed.
April 12, 2023 (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI)
aarti JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:054920
3 of 3
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!