NATHU RAM Vs. TILAK RAJ AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has invoked jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, assailing order dated 18.5.2009 passed by the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Batala, whereby the Executing Court has dismissed the objection filed by the petitioner under Order 21 Rule 97 read with Section 151 CPC.

(2.) To understand the controversy between the parties, family tree is being reproduced hereunder:

(3.) Tilak Raj son of Bawi, one of the daughters of Ram Narayan, preferred Civil Suit No. 359 of 1998 in the Court of Civil Judge Junior Division, Batala, against Ram Piari, Durga, Nirmal and Vijay, seeking a declaration to the effect that the plaintiff is owner of the house marked ABCDEF as shown in the site plan annexed with the plaint. Main ground taken in the plaint by Tilak Raj was that the house in dispute originally belonged to Smt. Guro and her sister Smt. Bawi having been inherited by them from their parents, who had no son. Plaintiff is the son of Smt. Bawi, whereas defendants No. 1 and 2 are the daughters of Guro and defendant No. 3 is the daughter of defendant No. 1 and defendant No. 4 is the son-in-law of defendant No. 2; Smt. Guro having two daughters i.e. defendant No. 1 and defendant No. 2 and one son, who has died since long unmarried and husband of Smt. Guro and Smt. Bawi were residing in the joint house i.e. house in dispute. Plaintiff was looking after Smt. Guro and due to love and affection and services rendered by plaintiff, Smt. Guro gave the said portion of house vide document dated 7.3.1993 to the plaintiff, as such the plaintiff is in actual physical possession of the said house. Defendants tried to dispossess the plaintiff forcefully and illegally, hence cause of action arose to the plaintiff to file the suit.