KRISHNA MOHAN Vs. BAL KRISHNA CHATURVEDI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL the above four appeals have been filed against the judgment and decree dated 13-5-1982 passed by Sri K. C. Bhargava, the then learned Ist Additional District Judge, ALLahabad in Civil Appeal No. 46 of 1979, 45 of 1979, 642 of 1979 and 571 of 1979 respectively which were decided by a common judgment.

(2.) KRISHNA Mohan and Ram Mohan, appellants in all four appeals (hereinafter called the appellants) filed Original Suit No. 91 of 1968 on 24-5-1967, through their next friend, against Bal KRISHNA Chaturvedi, the respondent No. 1 in all the four appeals, for permanent injunction, restraining the respondent No. 1 from interfering in their peaceful possession over the open land shown with green colour in the plaint map and house shown with letters Aa, Ba, Sa, Da and red colour in plaint map. The case of the appellants, briefly stated was that the house shown with letters Aa, Ba, Sa, Da existing over Plot No. 905 of Mohalla Daraganj, Allahabad city, was constructed by their father Ram Avtar and he was in possession over it till his lifetime. The open land shown with green colour in the plaint map was appurtenant to the said house and was being used by their father for the purpose of 'sehan' for tethering cattle, preparing cow dung cakes and for keeping other domestic articles. After death of their father the appellants came in possession over the house and the land in suit as its owners. They further pleaded that their father Ram Avatar had perfected his title over the house and land in suit by way of adverse possession and the same was inherited by the appellants. Respondent-Bal KRISHNA Chaturvedi had no concern or connection with the house and land in suit, but he threatened to take forcible possession over it. They further alleged that the mental condition of their mother was not sound and, therefore, she was not competent to become their next friend.

(3.) THE appellants Krishna Mohan and Ram Mohan contested the above suit on the grounds which they had taken in their suit No. 91 of 1968 and raising further pleas of non-joinder and limitation etc.