RADHE SHYAM Vs. SHYAMA CHARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff-respondents' suit for permanent prohibitory injunction seeking to restrain the defendant-appellants and the defendant-respondents 2 to 6 from interfering with the plaintiff's possession over the suit property denoted by letters EFGJ at the foot of the plaint, was dismissed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Powayan Shahjahanpur vide judgment and decree dtd. 30/8/2017. Upon the plaintiff's appeal, the learned Additional District Judge, Shahjahanpur has reversed the decree and decreed the suit vide judgment and decree dtd. 23/5/2022.

(2.) The case of the plaintiffs is that the suit property is appurtenant to their residential abadi and is used as their sehan, of which the closest English equivalent is a courtyard. A sehan, however, in rural India is slightly different from a courtyard. It is an open piece of land, just in front of one's house, utilized for diverse activities of life; virtually the closest equivalent of an open air living room, adjacent to one's house.

(3.) The plaintiffs' claim that the abadi that they live in, of which the suit property is an appurtenance, has come down to them from their ancestors. The existence of the plaintiffs' abadi abutting the suit property is not in dispute. The plaintiffs, therefore, claimed title and possession of the suit property as land appurtenant to their abadi, which they utilized as a sehan.