PABBAR RAM Vs. BHAGWAN DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present Second Appeal arises out of a suit for possession of the land and for demolition of unauthorised construction standing thereon. THE suit was instituted by one Munni Lal alias Mulla. He died during the pendency of the suit and his sons and legal representatives were brought on the record.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case, as alleged by the plaintiff, are that Smt. Belsi was the owner of house no. 38 in Mohalla Mahanpura in the town of Ghazipur. THE house stood on the land in suit shown by letters ' FGKLF ' in the plaint map. Smt. Belsi then sold the house to Munni Lal on 7th March, 1946 for a consideration of Rs. 69-15 Annas 9 Paise and thereafter Munni Lal entered into possession of the same. It is alleged that during absence of Munni Lal the appellant Pabbar Ram trespassed on the land in suit and constructed a room ' FGIN ' and walls ' LN ' and ' JK ' as shown in the plaint map. THE defendant-appellant Pabbar Ram denied the plaint allegations. According to him, the disputed constructions have been made on his own foundation in the land of courts of ward after taking its permission. It is also not in dispute that Smt. Belsi was the maternal grandmother of the appellant. THE defendant-appellant denied the claim made by the plaintiff in suit.

(3.) IT cannot be said that mandatory injunction should only be granted when pecuniary compensation would not afford adequate relief. Even if it could be said that it is a consideration for the grant of injunction, the discretion has to be exercised on the basis of facts of each case. Where there is invasion for very minor right or encroachment which are insignificant or the plaintiff does not suffer on account of the encroachment or of other facts, it would make grant of pecuniary compensation in lieu of demolition as an equitable relief, the court has such discretion to grant as a relief. This principle could not be doubted.