IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** 128 RSA-2421-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision.:24.09.2025 Harnek Singh (since deceased) through LRs …..Appellants Vs. Jagjit Singh and Others .….Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present:- Mr. Gunjeet Singh Brar, Advocate for the appellants. **** DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL) Plainffs of the case are before this Court against reversal, inasmuch as suit for permanent injuncon filed by them was decreed by the trial Court on 10.12.2021 but the first Appellate court allowed the appeal of the defendants i.e. respondents herein vide judgment dated 06.05.2025 and dismissed the suit. 2. According to the plainffs, pares to the suit owned and possessed the suit land as co-sharers but vide an arrangement in wring made on 12.05.1996, the suit land had fallen to the share of plainffs. It is alleged that defendants were interfering in their possession and so, the prayer was made for seeking decree of permanent injuncon. 3. On specific query put by this Court, it is conceded by learned counsel for the appellants that even if the wring dated 12.05.1996 on which the plainffs-appellants had relied upon is taken to be duly proved, it was never reported to the revenue authories. Learned counsel for the appellants candidly admi3ed that the said arrangement was never NEETIKA TUTEJA 2025.09.24 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2421-2025 (O&M) -2- reported to the revenue authories nor incorporated in the revenue record. The revenue record sll shows the pares to be co-owners. 4. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the first Appellate Court did not commit any error in dismissing the suit, by se6ng aside the judgment of the trial Court. No merits. Dismissed. All the miscellaneous applicaon(s), if any, stand disposed of. ( DEEPAK GUPTA ) JUDGE September 24, 2025 Neeka Tuteja Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No NEETIKA TUTEJA 2025.09.24 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document