BANWARI Vs. OM KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by one of the defendants is directed against the judgment of the learned first Appellate Court dated 26.8.2009 vide which the judgment of the learned trial Court dated 15.4.2009 was reversed.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the plaintiff-respondents filed a suit for permanent injunction on the plea that they were owners in possession of the suit property for the last more than 30 years. The property was purchased from Jogi Ram, Hari Ram, Smt. Chandro and the father of the appellant-defendant and since then they are in continuous possession of the same. They had constructed boundary wall and two rooms, installed a hand pump and planted trees in it. It was alleged that the appellant-defendants were trying to usurp the possession and interfere in their peaceful possession. The appellants took up the plea that the plaintiff- respondents are not the owners and neither they are in physical possession of the property in dispute. It was pleaded that the disputed property is part of Killa nos. 111, 112 and 113 which was jointly owned by the ancestors of the appellant-defendants, out of which some land had been alienated to one Jane son of Jitan Lal about 10 years ago while some land was still in possession of some of the defendants. The site plan attached with the plaint was also disputed and it was pleaded that in the revenue records the plaintiff- respondents have been erroneously recorded as owners in possession who have rather executed affidavits in favour of the defendants surrendering the possession of the disputed property. The parties went to trial on the following issues :-

(3.) The learned trial court concluded that the suit of the plaintiff-respondents was misconceived and the same was dismissed. In appeal, the findings were reversed.