IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** 119 CR-3443-2026 Date of Decision: 23.04.2026 Ranbir and Another …..Pe,,oners Vs. State of Haryana and Others .….Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present:- Mr. Jitender Kumar Sehrawat, Advocate for the peoners. **** DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL) In the paron proceedings between the contesng pares Sanad Takseem was issued on 16.11.2012 by Assistant Collector 2nd Grade, Narnaund, District Hisar. Plainffs (peoners herein) instuted a suit in March, 2026 before the Court so as to restrain the contesng defendants from ge0ng the property demarcated as per Sanad Takseem. However the trial Court by way of impugned order dated 23.03.2026 (Annexure P-2) had adjourned the ma6er and in the meanme, directed the defendants to get the property demarcated, if needed, only a7er 20.04.2026. Assailing the order, it is contended by learned counsel that appeal before the Commissioner is sll pending against the Sanad Takseem. However on specific query by this Court, learned counsel concedes that even the appeal before the Commissioner was filed in March, 2026 i.e. almost a7er 14 years from the date of issuance of the Sanad Takseem. NEETIKA TUTEJA 2026.04.23 17:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-3443-2026 -2- In the aforesaid circumstances, this Court does not find any illegality or perversity in the impugned order. No merits. Dismissed. (DEEPAK GUPTA) JUDGE April 23, 2026 Neeka Tuteja Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No NEETIKA TUTEJA 2026.04.23 17:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document