Vazir Singh And Others v. State Of Haryana And Others

LPA-1046-2026 (O&M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH LPA-1046-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 06.05.2026 Vazir Singh and others ...Appellants Vs.

State of Haryana and others

...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA

Present:

Mr. Nipun Vashishtha, Advocate for the appellants.

Ms. Anu Pal, Addl. A.G. Haryana.

*** HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J.(Oral) 1.

The present appeal has been filed challenging the order passed by the learned Single Judge by which, the order passed by the authority vide which partition already made was set aside and direction was issued to the Assistant Collector GradeI to re-decide the partition proceedings between the parties, has been upheld by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 18.02.2026. 2.

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that he is ready to compromise with the respondent with regard to the change of the land and therefore, remanding the case back for fresh partition proceedings, will delay the said process and therefore, the order passed by the authorities remanding the case back for fresh partition proceedings may kindly be set aside. 3.

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance. VANITA 2026.05.07 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order and judgment

LPA-1046-2026 (O&M) 4.

Before proceeding further, it may be noticed that a finding has been recorded by the revenue authority as well as by the learned Single Judge that the partition of the said land has been done in a manner which cause immense prejudice to respondent No.4. Entire land on the road/passage has been given to the appellants and no portion of the land partitioned in the favour of the respondent touches the road. The said issue has been taken into consideration while directing the authorities to re-look and re-do the partition proceedings. 5.

Learned counsel for the appellants has not been able to dispute the said factual averment and has not been able to rebut the finding recorded by the learned Single Judge.

6.

The only argument raised is that efforts should be made for reaching at a compromise between the parties. As the partition proceedings have already been remanded back to the revenue authority nothing stops appellants to appear before the revenue authorities and approach the respondent for amicable settlement. 7.

Keeping in view of the above, no ground is made out for interference as the order passed by the authorities as well as learned Single Judge has not been able to prove perverse either on facts or on law.

8.

LPA stands dismissed.

9.

Pending civil miscellaneous application, if any, stands disposed of. (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) JUDGE (DEEPAK MANCHANDA) JUDGE 06.05.2026 vanita Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether Reportable :

No VANITA 2026.05.07 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order and judgment