PAWAN MEHRA Vs. BANWARI LAL AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rfa No. 602/2006

(2.) The facts of the case are that the appellant/plaintiff pleaded that he is the co-owner of the suit property, and since the respondent/defendant was a trespasser in the suit property, hence the respondent/defendant was asked to vacate by serving a Legal Notice dated 211.200 However, the respondent/defendant failed to vacate the suit property hence the subject suit for possession was filed in which mesne profits were also claimed at Rs. 2,000/- per month from three years prior to the filing of the suit.

(3.) The respondent/defendant contested the suit by filing written statement. It was pleaded by the respondent/defendant that he was the owner of the suit property because he had purchased it from Sh. Ganesh. It was also pleaded by the respondent/defendant that he had become owner of the suit property on account of adverse possession.