RAM Vs. JAI PRAKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed against the order dated 8th January, 1990 passed by Shri HP. Sharma, Senior Sub Judge, Delhi wheteby the order of the learned Sub Judge dated 12th September, 1989 directing maintenance of status quo of the property in dispute has been reversed.

(2.) The relevant facts necessary for determining the point in controversy between the parties are these. The petitioner filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the respondents claiming a decree for declaration to the effect that the petitioner is the sole heir and successor of Shri Om Prakash, son of late Shri Ram Sarup Saini of village Bijwasan, Delhi, having succeeded to his rights, title and interests in the land in dispute. He also claimed a decree tor permanent injunction restraining the respondents from interfering in the petitioner's right, title and interest therein at any time.

(3.) The suit of the plaintiff-petitioner is founded on the claim that he is the male lineal descendant of late Shri Gurdayal. He is his surviving son and Shri Om Parkash was the son of the real brother of the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner was a nearest natural successor of his lands and estate in comparison to the other respondents. Shri Om Parkash, who admittedly has been declared as a Bhoomidar of the land in dispute has not been heard for the last more than seven years since the year 1980 and, therefore, he is presumed to have died. Respondents 2 to 4 have not opposed the case of the petitioner. Respondent No. I has, however, contested the suit and has claimed succession to the land in dispute by virtue of an adoption deed dated 18.1.1980-which has been disputed by the petitioner.