(1.) This is plaintiff's second appeal under Section 100 C.P.C.
(2.) The plaintiff-appellant filed a suit against defendants-respondents, his cousin brothers for permanent injunction. The defendant nos. 2 and 3 are sons of plaintiff's father's real brother namely Shri Chand. The plaintiff's case was that on 26.06.1940, a sale deed was executed in favour of his father and uncles in respect of Khasra no. 1797, area admeasuring 7 Biswa and they are in possession and have constructed their separate houses. In the year 1958, a family settlement was arrived at in the presence of grand father of the plaintiff and in terms of the said settlement, the plaintiff's father and his uncles got their share and they are in possession. The disputed property which have been shown by letters A, B, C and D in the plaint map was allotted to his father Beni Ram and after the death of his father in the year 1984, the plaintiff has become the owner and in possession of the suit property. It is stated that in the family settlement, it was agreed by all the parties that the area shown in the plaint map as E, F. G, H. N, M and O, admeasuring 165 feet was left for Sehan for common use. It is stated that the defendant no. 2 has executed a sale deed in favour of defendant no. 1. The cause of action arose when the defendant no. 1 tried to raise construction over the suit property. The trial court dismissed the suit recording the finding that the plaintiff has failed to prove that the suit property was a Sehan land which is used by the plaintiff and it also found that from the record, it was established that the suit property was given to father of defendant no. 2, Jagveer and later he executed a sale deed in favour of defendant no. 1. The trial court has also recorded the finding that the plaintiff was not in possession of the Sehan land.
(3.) Aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the trial court, the plaintiff went in appeal which was also dismissed by the appellate court affirming the findings of the trial court.