CHHAGANBHAI MOTIBHAI VASAVA Vs. DHANABHAI MOTIBHAI VASAVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code is at the instance of the heirs of the original defendant against whom the respondent ­ original plaintiff filed Regular Civil Suit No.61 of 1996 for permanent injunction.

(2.) IT is the case of the plaintiff that property mentioned in paragraph No.1 of the plaint being survey Nos.179, 184, Vada No.3 and Vada No.4 with residential house came the share of the plaintiff on partition of the joint family property. The plaintiff has been in possession of the said property. It is further case of the plaintiff that family of the plaintiff and defendant was joint family and after death of their father, the property mentioned in paragraph No.2 of the plaint being survey Nos.195 and 179 came to be entered in the name of defendant under the tenancy law as he was elder son in the family. The plaintiff has further stated that though the said property was in the name of the defendant, both the brothers continued to enjoy possession thereof jointly and also continued to pay installments jointly of the said lands. The plaintiff has further averred that before about 16 years, the property mentioned in paragraph No.1 of the plaint came to the share of the plaintiff in partition and since then, the plaintiff has been cultivating the land and taking yield thereof and also paying revenue for the said property. However, on 07.08.1996, the defendant threatened to snatch away possession of the said property and, therefore, the plaintiff filed caveat application on 08.08.1996 and when plaintiff went to the land bearing survey No.179, at that time, the defendant and his son came at the said land and administered threat to the plaintiff for not cultivating the said land. The plaintiff was therefore required to file the suit for relief of permanent injunction against defendant restraining defendant from interfering with possession of the suit property of the plaintiff. The defendant resisted the suit by filing written statement at Ex.18 and denied the allegations and averments made in the plaint.

(3.) LEARNED Trial Judge answered the aforesaid issues as under:-