SHEO MURAT RAI Vs. SITA RAM RAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal has been filed by the defendant-appellant, challenging the judgment and decree dated 28.3.1980, passed by lower appellate court, as well as judgment and decree dated 22.12.1979, passed by the trial court. Plaintiff-respondent's suit for permanent and mandatory injunction and for possession has been decreed in its entirety by the lower appellate court.

(2.) Perusal of the records goes to show that original suit No. 131 of 1971 was filed by the plaintiff-respondent with the allegation that the suit property originally belonged to late Beni Rai and after his death, plaintiff-respondent became owner and came in possession over the suit property, on the basis of inheritance. It was also stated that plaintiff-respondent has continued to remain in possession over the suit property and the same is liable to have been settled in his favour by virtue of Sec. 9 of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act. Various other averments with regard to planting of tree etc. were made. It was stated that defendant-appellant without any authority raised construction of chabutara and also started raising further constructions like naabdan etc., which has given a cause for filing of suit.

(3.) The suit was contested by the defendant-appellant by stating that plaintiff-respondent has no right over the suit property nor he is in possession over it. It was also stated that plaintiff-respondent is not related to late Beni Rai in any manner. It was further stated that house of the defendant-appellant situates upon plot No. 17 and the entire constructions, which are being alleged to have been raised recently, are all old existing constructions. Further plea of Sec. 9 of the Act was also setup in defence by the defendant-appellant on the ground that suit property is an appurtenant land and would stand settled in them by statutory scheme.