N.C. Sapra vs Sukhbir Singh And Ors
2024 Latest Caselaw 14280 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

N.C. Sapra vs Sukhbir Singh And Ors on 9 August, 2024

                                         Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:102809




                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                                   AT CHANDIGARH
                                        ****

106
                                                         RSA-4976-2016
                                                         Date of Decision.:09.08.2024

N.C. Sapra                                                      Appellant
                                                 Vs.
Sukhbir Singh and Others                                        Respondents

CORAM:       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA

Present:     Mr. Amandeep Rana, Advocate
             for the appellant.

             ****

DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL)

Plain ff of the case is against the concurrent findings of the Courts below. The dispute is rela ng to the alleged encroachment on the part of the defendant- respondents in a gali. The trial Court vide judgment dated 10.07.2014 dismissed the suit by finding that there was no encroachment. The findings have been upheld by the first Appellate court. It will be appropriate to reproduce the observa ons made by the first Appellate Court which reads as under:

"As per decree (Ex.P5) the propery measuring 60 sq. yards was transferred to the plain!ff from his mother Smt. Bhirawan Bai.

Smt. Bhirawan Bai purchased 240 sq. years plot vide sale deed Ex.P6 which was bounded as North : Plot, South: Plot, East Rasta 15 .. wide , West 20 .. wide. Thus, the plot owned by Bhirawan Bai was having two rasta i.e. one 15 feet wide (disputed Gali ) and other 20 feet wide. Accordingly, again it can not be said that the disputed Gali was le. originally for the plot of the plain!ff only to the exclusion of others. The disputed Gali has not been shown as private Gali.

As regards the encroachment upon the disputed Gali is concerned, admi2edly the Gali is 15 .. wide in the record and PW2 Ramesh Kumar (Local Commissioner) found the width of the disputed Gali as 14 .. at the spot. As per site plan of the defendants (Ex.D2) also, the width at the spot has been shown as 14 feet wide. The plots of the different persons exist on either side of the Gali. PW4 Sh. NC Sapra (plain!ff) has admi2ed in his cross-examina!on that Local Commissioner did not get

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:102809

RSA-4976-2016

demarcated the Gali !ll date. He further admi2ed that when he filed the suit, the defendants had the construc!on on the plot of the defendants was upto 2 feet at the site. Even otherwise, as per the sale deed (Ex.D1) of the defendants, the width of plot of defendants is 38 feet but it is only 34 feet exis!ng at the spot as per site plan Ex.D2. Thus, again it can not be said that the defendants encorached upon the Gali."

A,er hearing learned counsel for the appellant, this Court does not find any reason whatsoever to interfere in the well-reasoned concurrent findings of the facts as recorded by the Courts below.

No substan al ques on of law is found to be involved.

Dismissed.

                                                             ( DEEPAK GUPTA )
                                                                  JUDGE
August 09, 2024
Nee ka Tuteja


                Whether Speaking/reasoned            Yes/No
                Whether Reportable                   Yes/No




                                           2 of 2