INDER SINGH Vs. SHER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is plaintiff's second appeal. Plaintiff filed the present suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants Sher Singh and Hardial Singh from forcibly and illegally dispossessing him otherwise than in due course of law from the land in dispute. Plaintiff's case is that he has built his house on the property in dispute and is residing there along with his family as owner for the last more than 30 years. In other words, acquisition of owndership by way of adverse possession is the main basis for claiming relief of permanent injunction against them. Defendants contested the suit and it was alleged by Sher singh, defendant No. 1 that he is the owner of the property in dispute having purchased the same from Sucha singh on 6th February, 1957. He further claimed that he is in possession of the same. Allegations of the plaintiff as regards ownership and adverse possession have been denied. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed :-

(2.) I have gone through the orders of both the Courts below and find substance in the submission of learned counsel for the appellant to this extent. Both the Courts have found the plaintiff to be in possession of the property in dispute. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents could not assail this findings of the Courts below. It was submitted by him that once having found that plaintiff is in possession of the property in dispute, the Courts below should have granted an injunction in his favour to the effect that he should not be dispossessed except in due course of law. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents did not seriously contest the proposition that the plaintiff having been found in possession of the property in dispute, could not be dispossessed except in due course of law.

(3.) For the aforementioned reasons, findings on issue Nos. 1 and 2 recorded by the courts below are affirmed, appeal is dismissed except to the extent that the plaintiff shall not be dispossessed from the property in dispute except in due course of law. No order as to costs.