(1.) This appeal is filed challenging the judgment and decree dtd. 30/1/2021 passed in R.A. NO.3/2015 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Harihar.
(2.) This appeal is listed for admission. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties.
(3.) The factual matrix of the case of the respondent/plaintiff before the Trial Court that she has filed the suit for the relief of permanent injunction contending that the plaintiff is in lawful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property and the appellant/defendant is interfering with her possession over the said property. The appellant/defendant also filed a counter claim contending that he is in actual possession and enjoyment over the site No.182, Assessment No.254/D measuring 30 x 130 feet and also contended that the respondent/plaintiff is interfering with his property. The Trial Court based on the pleadings of the parties, framed the Issues and Additional Issues and allowed the parties to lead their evidence. The Trial Court having considered the material on record answered Issue Nos.1 to 3 as affirmative in coming to the conclusion that the respondent/plaintiff is in lawful possession and enjoyment over the suit schedule property and the appellant/defendant is interfering with the possession of the respondent/plaintiff and answered Additional Issue Nos.1 to 3 as negative and dismissed the claim of the appellant/defendant. Being aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the Trial Court, an appeal was preferred before the First Appellate Court. The First Appellate Court also considering the grounds urged in the appeal memo, formulated the point that whether the Trial Court has committed an error in granting the relief of permanent injunction and whether it requires interference. The First Appellate Court also on re-appreciation of both oral and documentary evidence placed on record answered the said point as negative and dismissed the appeal. Hence, the present appeal is filed before this Court by the appellant/defendant.