Dismissed

Arun Narang v. Arjun Dass Suneja

Punjab & Haryana HC26 Aug 2016RSA/241/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab & Haryana dismissed the appeal against the Lower Appellate Court's dismissal of a suit for damages. The court held that the appellant failed to prove that the alleged damages were caused by the respondent's construction rather than the age of the building.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed; the judgment and decree of the Lower Appellate Court were affirmed.

Arun Narang Vs Arjun Dass Suneja — Cheating and Forgery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2016)

¶1

RSA No.241 of 2016 (O& M)

¶2

{1}

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

RSA No.241 of 2016 (O&M) Date of decision:26.08.2016

¶5

Arun Narang ... Appellant Vs. Arjun Dass Suneja ... Respondent

¶6

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

¶7

Present:Mr. Sandeep Kumar Sharma, Advocate for the appellant.

¶8

AMIT RAWAL J. (Oral)

¶9

C.M.No.800-C of 2016

¶10

For the reasons stated in the application, duly supported by an affidavit, delay of 40 days in filing the appeal is condoned.

¶11

C.M. stands disposed of.

¶12

RSA No.241 of 2016 (O&M)

¶13

Appellant-plaintiff is aggrieved of the dismissal of the suit by the Lower Appellate Court seeking damages on account of the construction raised by the defendant-respondent.

¶14

Mr. Sandeep Kumar Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant-plaintiff submits that suit for damages, aforementioned was filed as the defendant-respondent after purchasing plot

¶15

Savita 2016.08.30 10:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶16

RSA No.241 of 2016 (O& M) {2}

¶17

started digging foundation which caused damages to the wall, roof and as well as other wall of the house belonging to the appellant, i.e., western side of suit property. PW3 – Architect has been examined to show the report as un-shattered. On the basis of the aforementioned aspect, the trial Court decreed the suit but the Lower Appellate Court has set aside the findings on the premise that appellant-plaintiff has miserably failed to prove his case, but has not assigned any reasons while reversing the well reasoned judgment and decree of the trial Court except a passing reference which is not sufficient ground as the damages caused have been proved through the testimony of PW3 and thus, urges this Court for setting aside the judgment and decree rendered by the Lower Appellate Court.

¶18

I have heard learned counsel for the appellant-plaintiff and appraised the judgments and decrees of the Courts below and of the view that plaintiff has miserably failed to prove the level of the house 1½ feet above the level of the street. Even plot was also lying vacant towards North side of his house. The alleged report is of subsequent date and the Court below was unable to find out whether the damages caused were prior or after the construction. Once breadth of the wall is done, there could be cracks in the walls and the window owing to the age of the building of B grade. In my view, the plaintiff has miserably failed to discharge the onus as per the provisions enshrined under Section 101 of Indian Evidence Act.

¶19

In view of the aforementioned observations, I do not intend to differ with the findings rendered by the Lower Appellate Court which are based upon the appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, much less,

¶20

Savita 2016.08.30 10:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶21

RSA No.241 of 2016 (O& M)

¶22

{3}

¶23

no substantial question of law arises for determination of this Court.

¶24

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

¶25

	(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE
August 26, 2016
savita
Whether speaking/reasoned	Yes/No
Whether Reportable	Yes/No

¶26

Savita 2016.08.30 10:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

Arun Narang v. Arjun Dass Suneja

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun Narang v. Arjun Dass Suneja

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Naresh Kohli and Others Vs Raj Kumar @ Nandu and Another

Ravinder Singh Vs Rajesh Kumar and Anr.

Pb. St. Civil Supplies Corp. Ltd. and Anr. Vs Gurcharan Singh

M/S Jct Electronics Ltd., A-32, Indl. Area Ph-Viii, Sas Nagar, Mohali Vs -

(O&M) Bhagat Ram Vs Ram Pratap and Others

Subhash Vs Azad Singh and Ors.