RANJIT KAUR Vs. RAM NARAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RANJIT Kaur and others, unsuccessful plaintiffs have filed the present appeal and it has been directed against the judgment and decree date 22.2.1999, passed by the Addl. Distt. Judge, Bathinda, who affirmed the judgment and decree dated 5.3.1994, passed by the Court of Sub Judge Ist Class, Bathinda, vide which the suit of the plaintiffs for possession was dismissed.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the plaintiffs filed a suit for possession of the land measuring 3 kanals 12 marlas against Ram Narain, defendant-respondent. The land was comprised in khasra No. 200 in village Nandgarh, Tehsil and District Bathinda. The case set up by the plaintiffs before the Court was that they are owners of the suit land as per jamabandi for the year 1983-84 and that the defendant had illegally occupied the same in April 1982, by forcibly dispossessing the plaintiffs for which they had no right to do so. On these small allegations, the plaintiffs prayed for the decreetal of the suit. The suit was contested by the defendant and it was pleaded that the defendant and his predecessors are in possession of the suit land since the year 1957-58. Their possession was open, hostile and adverse to the real owners. In this view of the matter, the defendant has become the owner of the suit land. Initially, Atma Ram and his brothers were in possession of the suit land. Subsequently, Atma Ram alone came into the possession of the said land and after the death of Atma Ram, the defendant entered into the possession. His possession is adverse and hostile to the real owner and the defendant has become the owner of the suit land by lapse of time. It was also pleaded by the defendant that the plaintiffs have no locus standi to file the suit and that the suit is not legally maintainable.

(3.) THE parties led oral and documentary evidence in support of their case and the learned trial Court ultimately, dismissed the suit. On issue No. 7, the findings of the trial Court went against the plaintiffs. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the trial Court, the unsuccessful plaintiffs filed the first appeal before the Court of the Addl. Distt. Judge, Bathinda, who for the reason given in para-15 of the judgment, dismissed the same. Para-15 reads as under :-