ASHIK ALI Vs. HARIGEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal arises out of a suit filed for permanent injunction by the plaintiff-respondent, restraining the defendant-appellant from interfering in his possession and from raising of construction over the suit property. Suit was dismissed by the trial court on 25.2.1982, but has been decreed by the lower appellate court, vide judgment and decree dated 11.12.1984, passed in Civil Appeal No.40 of 1982. Being aggrieved, the defendant-appellant has preferred this appeal.

(2.) Facts giving rise to filing of the instant appeal are that plaintiff Chhotai filed suit for permanent injunction with the allegation that his uncle Kalicharan was the occupant of suit property since 1331 Fasli, and upon his death the plaintiff has remained in continuous possession. In the plaint, Chhotai set-out the following family tree to explain his relationship with Kalicharan:- <JUDIMG>587347-1</JUDIMG>

(3.) According to the plaint averment, plaintiff's ancestors for a longtime had remained in possession over the suit property and thereafter plaintiff continued to remain in its possession and that defendant had no concern with the land in suit. It has been asserted that on 9.1.1975 Chhotai started getting the foundation dug for the purposes of constructing a house, which has been objected by the defendant-appellant without any right and title, and as the defendant-appellant was bent upon creating trouble, necessity arose for the plaintiff-respondent to file the suit.