MOOLCHAND Vs. RADHA SHARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant-defendant has called in question the judgment and decree dated 28.1.1991 passed by the Second Additional District Judge, Raisen in Civil Regular Appeal No. 3-A/89 reversing the judgment and decree dated 4.2.1989 regarding dismissal of the suit passed by the Civil Judge Class-I Bareli in Civil Original Suit No. 3-A/84.

(2.) A suit for perpetual and mandatory injunction was filed by respondents with pleadings that one Amrit Lal Dubey was the owner of a dilapidated house situated at Bareli Bazar. This house also had a small passage, so called 'Gali'. One portion of this house adjoining to this 'Gali' was purchased by the appellant vide sale deed dated 18.4.1962 from said Amrit Lal Dubey which is described with the red colour in the map annexed with the sale deed. Subsequent to this transaction the remaining part of this house was purchased by the respondent vide sale deed dated 16.7.1972. According to it remaining part of the said house after selling to the appellant was transferred to the respondent. The said 'Gali', subject matter of this suit had remained towards eastern side of the house of respondents and just behind the house of the appellant. The house of Rishiraj and Brij Mohan Chandak is also situated towards the western side of this 'Gali'. As per sale deed of the respondents said 'Gali' is a part of his property on which appellant has made some construction of septic tank by encroaching it. In such circumstances the suit was filed for perpetual injunction to restrain him from further construction and also for mandatory injunction for demolition of construction which had been made by him.

(3.) IN view of the aforesaid pleadings issues were framed by the trial Court. On giving the opportunity to lay the evidence neither of the parties have led the evidence, as such no witnesses have been examined to prove the facts as pleaded by them.