ABDUL SHAKOOR Vs. KHURSHEED KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of an appellate decree passed in proceedings under Sec. 144 of the Code of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (for short, 'the Code').

(2.) The plaintiff, Abdul Shakoor, instituted Original Suit No. 275 of 1988 before the Court of Munsif, Sambhal (now Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Sambhal), praying that a permanent injunction be granted against the defendant, Khursheed Khan, restraining him from interfering with the plaintiff raising construction over the suit property, himself taking possession of it or raising construction thereon or interfering in any manner with the plaintiff's possession therein.

(3.) It is pleaded by the plaintiff-appellant (for short, 'the plaintiff') that he is the owner in possession of a plot of land, bearing Khasra No. 109/3, admeasuring 14 decimal, situate in Village Jalal Khan, acquiring his title through a sale-deed dtd. 29/5/1985 executed by its former owner, Gayasuddin in the plaintiff's favour. The plaintiff's further case is that some 200 eucalyptus trees are standing on the suit property. The plaintiff sought permission of the Municipal Board, Sambhal to raise constructions on the said property, submitting a plan for the purpose. The plan submitted was objected to by the defendant, urging a case that the defendant is the owner of Khasra Nos. 109/1 and 109/2, admeasuring 32 decimal. The plaintiff's case pleaded in the plaint is that the defendant is owner in possession of Khasra Nos. 109/1 and 109/2. Khasra No. 109/3 is adjacent to the road and the said fact had allured the defendant into harassing the plaintiff. The defendant filed a suit for injunction, bearing O.S. No. 86 of 1987, Khursheed Khan v. Abdul Shakoor, before the Court of Munsif, Sambhal, which is pending. The said suit was instituted with a case that the suit property is part of Khasra No. 109, seeking a relief that the plaintiff may not take possession of a specific portion of Khasra No. 109 or raise constructions over any specific part thereof. The plaintiff's further case is that before the plaintiff purchased the suit property, Khasra No. 109 had been divided and separately entered in the revenue papers in order to obviate any dispute between the purchasers of its different parts. The plaintiff had purchased the suit property for a sum of Rs.20,000.00 admeasuring 14 decimals whereas the defendant purchased 32 decimals for a sum of Rs.10,000.00. The defendant on 26/10/1988 brought forth some masons and labourers, who attempted to lay a foundation for construction in the suit property without authority. It is the plaintiff's case that on the other hand the defendant resists the plaintiff raising constructions in the suit property, preventing him from doing so over his own land. It is on the basis of aforesaid case pleaded that the permanent injunction, above detailed, was sought by the plaintiff.