LAWS(UTN)-2019-4-50

RAKAM SINGH Vs. SRAWAN KUMAR AND ANOTHER

Decided On April 08, 2019
RAKAM SINGH Appellant
V/S
Srawan Kumar And Another Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Second Appeal has been preferred by the plaintiff /appellant, being aggrieved against the judgment and decree dated 19th February, 2019, as rendered by the Additional District Judge, Laksar, District Haridwar in Civil Appeal No. 34 of 2016, Rakam Singh Vs. Dal Singh and others dismissing the appeal as well as against the judgment and decree dated 31st July, 2016 as passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Laksar, District Haridwar in Civil Suit No. 185 of 2007, Rakam Singh Vs. Dal Singh & others, whereby, the suit of the plaintiff /appellant was dismissed.

(2.) In the case, at hand, a very peculiar situation which has emerged is that in relation to the same subject matter in controversy, i.e. the property, in dispute, more particularly, described at the foot of the plaint of Suit No. 185 of 2007, as preferred by the present plaintiff / appellant on 11th July, 2007, wherein, in the relief clause, he has sought a decree in the nature of permanent injunction, restraining the defendants of the present Suit from interference in any manner whatsoever in relation to the property, more particularly, described as a path by figure 'EFGHIJ' (as detailed at the foot of the plaint and plaint map), contending thereof, that the defendant may be restrained by way of a decree of permanent injunction from interfering and also from their act of raising construction of a wall and a gate of any nature on part of the property as detailed in the plaint map by figure 'AI' as detailed in the plaint map annexed by the plaintiff.

(3.) On the same day, itself, there was another Suit instituted by the present defendant / respondents, in relation to the same property, which was registered as Suit No. 186 of 2007, Dal Singh Vs. Rakam Singh. Yet again, the said Suit was in relation to the same subject matter of the present suit, i.e. the passage, in question, shown by figure 'EFGHIJ' (Suit No. 185 of 2006) and the plaintiff in the said Suit, i.e. the defendant, herein, had described the suit property by the figure 'ABCD' in the plaint map annexed along with the Suit No. 186 of 2007, Dal Singh Vs. Rakam Singh.