MANGILAL Vs. GAURISHANKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendant / appellant has come up in appeal aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the lower appellate Court issuing permanent preventive injunction against the defendant/ appellants restraining them from interfering with the possession of the plaintiff/ respondent over 9 mahua trees, in reversal of the decree of the trial Court which had dismissed the suit.

(2.) The trees are situated on the border of two villages namely village Chukni and village Dhakni, both of Tahsil Manasa. Land S. No. 410 situated within village Chukni is owned and possessed by the plaintiff/ respondent. Lands S. Nos. 82,83 and 84 are owned and possessed by the defendant/ appellants and are situated within village Dhakni. The Govt. land lying in between two villages is known as kankad. This Kankad situated between village Chukni and Dhakni is designated S. No. 411.

(3.) The plaintiff/ respondent filed the suit alleging that the 9 trees were situated over land S. No. 410 but the defendants were causing interference with the possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff. He prayed for a declaration of title over land S. No. 410 and the 9 Mahua trees standing thereon followed by an injunction preventing the defendant/ appellants from interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the land and trees by the plaintiff.