GENDALAL Vs. DEENNATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The dispute in this petition is with regard to the rights vis-a-vis a well situate on survey No.765. As per the petitioner he is also entitled to the user of the well whereas the case of the respondents Nos. 1,2, 3 and 4 is that they have exclusive right to use the well. It is highlighted that the well was constructed by forefathers of one of the respondents. The initial order was passed in favour of the petitioners, but the order of the Commissioner and Board of Revenue has gone against the petitioners.

(2.) On 8th of December, 1987 this court permitted all the parties to draw water from the well. The order passed by the Division Bench is as under :-

(3.) The learned Counsel for the petitioner argued that :-(1) His land touched the well in dispute whereas the land of respondents is situated away from the well.(2) A canal intervenes between the well and the land of the respondents.(3) The well is not a private well and for this the learned Counsel appearing for the state has placed reliance on some report having been submitted by the Patwari. This is noted in Annexure P-1.