GEETA Vs. BAL GOVIND ROHTGI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE challenge by means of this Regular First Appeal (RFA) filed under Section 96 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is to the impugned judgment of the trial Court dated 30.4.2010 dismissing the suit filed by the appellants/plaintiffs for possession of property bearing No. 547, Panna Udhyan, Village Narela, Delhi admeasuring 150 sq. yds., out of a total of 300 sq. yds.

(2.) THE facts as pleaded by the appellants/plaintiffs were that the maternal grandfather of the appellants/plaintiffs, namely, Sh. Ram Rik was the owner of 300 sq. yds. of land and the suit property admeasuring 150 sq. yds. is half of that land of 300 sq. yds. It was pleaded that Sh. Ram Rik left behind one son-Sh. Dhan Singh and one daughter-Smt. Vidya, and both of whom had become half owners each of the total property of 300 sq. yds. It was pleaded that the mother of Sh. Dhan Singh and Smt. Vidya i.e. wife of Sh.Ram Rik had given up her rights by virtue of a Will in favour of the mother of the appellants/plaintiffs and, consequently, Smt. Vidya was the owner of half of the property of 300 sq. yds., i.e. of 150 sq. yds.

(3.) THE only issue which has been argued before this Court is with respect to the fact that the trial Court ought to have at least granted a decree for possession and injunction with respect to 75 sq. yds. out of a total of 150 sq. yds., inasmuch as, it was pleaded on behalf of the appellants/plaintiffs that the mother of the appellants/plaintiffs was the owner of half of the portion of 300 sq. yds., i.e. 150 sq. yds., and the respondent/defendant had only shown to have purchased rights of 75 sq. yds. pursuant to the documentation dated 1.7.1999.