SATISH Vs. OM BATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the appellant/defendant impugning the concurrent Judgments of the courts below; of the Trial Court dated 31.7.2010 and the First Appellate Court dated 4.4.2012; by which the courts below have decreed the suit for declaration and mandatory injunction filed by the respondent/plaintiff with respect to the suit property being the property constructed on 42 sq. yds of land on property/plot bearing no.31, part of khasra no. 47/3 and 4/1, Village Palam, Delhi now known as House no. RZF-528, Raj Nagar, Part-II, Gali Subhash Park, Palam Colony, New Delhi. As per the judgments and decrees of the courts below respondent/plaintiff has been declared to be the owner of the suit property by virtue of the Sale Deed dated 20.9.2005 Ex.PW1/2 executed by Sh. Khushi Ram (father of respondent/plaintiff) in favour of the respondent/plaintiff. The appellant/defendant was held to be a licensee in the suit property and since the respondent/plaintiff was held to be the owner, reliefs of declaration and mandatory injunction were granted in favour of the respondent/plaintiff and against the appellant/defendant. The defences of the appellant/defendant that he was an adopted son of Sh. Khushi Ram and that the suit property was an ancestral property in which the respondent/plaintiff had a share have been rejected by the courts below.

(2.) The issues between the parties were of ownership of Sh. Khushi Ram and consequently of respondent/plaintiff on the one hand and of whether the appellant/defendant is the adopted son of Sh. Khushi Ram and the suit property is an ancestral property in which the appellant/defendant had a share whereby Sh. Khushi Ram could not have sold the suit property to the respondent/plaintiff under the Sale Deed dated 20.9.2005/Ex.PW1/2.

(3.) The trial court on 13.12.2006 framed the following issues:-