INDER SINGH Vs. RANDHIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE challenge in this appeal filed by appellant Inder Singh son of Deep Chand is to the judgment dated 30.8.2000, by virtue of which, the Ist appellate Court accepted the appeal, set aside the judgment and decree dated 7.10.1998 and remanded the case to the trial Court for its fresh decision.

(2.) THE conspectus of the facts, culminating in the commencement, relevant for a limited purpose of deciding the core controversy involved in the instant appeal and emanating from the record, is that Randhir Singh son of Bharte respondent No.1-plaintiff (hereinafter to be referred as "the plaintiff") filed the suit for a decree of permanent injunction restraining Inder Singh son of Deep Chand appellant-defendant and Savitri widow of Ramphal proforma-respondent No.2- defendant (hereinafter to be referred as "the defendants") from interfering into his peaceful possession, inter-alia, pleading that the parties to the suit had a common ancestor namely, Harphul, who was owner of the house in dispute. The plaintiff and defendants have separated about 20 years back. They mutually and orally partitioned the residential house by metes and bounds. The portion shown in red colour in the site plan had fallen to the share of the plaintiff, whereas the portion shown in green colour fell to the share of the defendants. Since then, they are exclusive owners and in possession of their respective portions of the disputed property. The defendants threatened to demolish the intervening wall marked by letters XY in the site plan without any legal right. Concisely, the plaintiff claimed that he is owner and in possession of the portion in question, but the defendants intend to disturb his possession without any legal right. On the basis of aforesaid allegations, the plaintiff filed the suit for a decree of permanent injunction against the defendants in the manner described here-in-above.

(3.) CONTROVERTING the allegations contained in the written statement and reiterating the pleadings of the plaint, the plaintiff filed the replication. In the wake of pleadings of the parties, the trial Court framed the following issues for proper adjudication of the case:-