RAKESH KUMAR Vs. SOHAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is application for impleading legal representatives of respondent no.1 Sohan Lal (since deceased). It is alleged that his sons Dharam Pal @ Dhammi and daughter Krishna Kumari, mentioned in paragraph 3 of the application are his only legal heirs. The application is accompanied by affidavit. Accordingly, the application is allowed and Dharam Pal @ Dhammi and Krishna Kumari, as mentioned in paragraph 3 of the application, are ordered to be impleaded as legal representatives of respondent no.1 Sohan Lal (since deceased). Necessary correction in `Memo of Parties' be made by the Office. Main Appeal :

(2.) Rakesh Kumar plaintiff, having been unsuccessful in both the courts below, has filed the instant second appeal. The plaintiff alleged that Sohan Lal defendant no.1 delivered possession of the suit property to the plaintiff vide agreement dated 19.02.1994 after receiving sale consideration of Rs.5,000/-. Plaintiff's sister Kaushalya Devi is using the suit property for running a Bhatthi (hearth) in it. However, the defendants threatened to dispossess the plaintiff from the suit property. So, the plaintiff sought permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering in the possession of the plaintiff over the suit property and from dispossessing the plaintiff therefrom in any manner. The defendants contested the suit and pleaded that plaintiff is not in possession of the suit property and rather one Satya is owner as well as in possession thereof. Defendant no.1 has no concern with the suit property, nor he agreed to sell the same to the plaintiff. Plaintiff's father Piara Lal was owner of the suit property and he sold it to Satya and delivered possession thereof to her. However, portion shown in green colour in the site plan, attached with the written statement, is in possession of defendant no.2.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the case file.