MULLO BAI Vs. BADRI PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal has been filed by the defendant being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 1.9.2008 passed by the District Judge, Guna, whereby learned District Judge has affirmed the judgment and decree dated 24.2.2006 passed by the Court of Ist Civil Judge, Class I, Guna, in civil suit No.14 - A/2003.

(2.) A suit was filed by the plaintiffs/respondents in this appeal wherein it was alleged that the present appellant, defendant, was encroaching on 3 ft. wide alley adjacent to the property of the plaintiffs, and therefore, relief in the form of permanent injunction was sought against the defendant not to reduce the width of the said alley from 3 ft. as existed earlier.

(3.) Learned trial Court decreed the suit after holding that there existed 3 ft wide alley between the house of the plaintiffs and the defendant and defendant has no right to encroach on the said alley. In fact, defendant had filed a written statement denying the existence of said alley and basically taken a defence that she is living in the said property for over 80 -90 years and now plaintiffs have no right to change the use of the said alley by the defendant after such a long time. It was also submitted that in the sale -deed dated 11.6.1959 (Ex.P/1), vide which the plaintiffs had purchased the said property from one Gopal Krishna, there is no mention of such alley, and therefore, the suit is based on imaginary and non -existent grounds and a prayer was made to dismiss the suit.