MAGANBHAI GOVINDBHAI PARMAR-DECD Vs. RAMANBHAI GAMBHIRBHAI PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Second Appeal under section-100 of the CPC is at the instance of the original defendants and is directed against the judgment and order dated 31/03/2015 passed by the learned 3rd Adhoc Additional District Judge, Ankleshwar, DistrictBharuch in Regular Civil Appeal No.20 of 2013 (old No.60 of 2004) arising from the judgment and decree dated 23/02/2004 passed by the learned Civil Judge (J.D.) Ankleshwar in Regular Civil Suit No.23 of 1999.

(2.) The appellants herein are the heirs of deceased Maganbhai Govindbhai Parmar - the original defendant. The respondent herein is the original plaintiff. The respondent herein filed a suit for possession of the suitproperty from the original defendant late Maganbhai Govindbhai Parmar. It is the case of the plaintiff that as a displaced person a plot bearing no.23 came to be allotted in his favour by an order passed by the Taluka Development Officer, Ankleshwar some time in the year 1970. The allotment of the plot was pursuant to a scheme of the State Government framed for the purpose of resettlement of all those persons, who had lost their land in floods. After the allotment, the plaintiff was put in possession of the plot, however, the plaintiff was not able to put up any construction on the said plot on account of his weak financial condition. According to the plaintiff, taking undue advantage of the fact that the plot allotted to him remained vacant, the defendant viz.late Maganbhai Govindbhai Parmar, who at the relevant point of time, was the Talaticummantri of the village encroached upon the same and put up illegal construction of a house. In the year 1998, when the plaintiff decided to put up construction on his plot no.23, he noticed that substantial portion of his plot had been encroached upon and unauthorised construction was put up. The plaintiff took up the issue with the authority concerned and the authority concerned informed the plaintiff that the plot no.23 allotted in his favour had been illegally encroached upon by the defendant and without any permission or sanction of plans had put up the construction of a house.

(3.) In such circumstances, the plaintiff had to file the regular civil suit for removal of the unauthorized construction and possession of the suitproperty i.e. plot no.23.