HARI SINGH Vs. JASWANT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Facts giving rise to the present Regular Second Appeal are as under: Appellants-plaintiffs filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the respondent-defendant from passing through the court-yard of then-house, duly described in the plaint and shown by red colour by letters 'ABCDEFGH' in site plan, Ex. P1, attached with the plaint and from using any part of the said court-yard as passage for ingress to and egress from their house and further restraining him from causing any obstruction in raising wall in their court-yard at points 'BC'.

(2.) Plea has been taken that earlier Dharam Singh, predecessor-in-interest of appellants-plaintiffs was owner in possession of the said house, who died about 7-1/2 years ago and after his death, they came into possession of the same as owners by virtue of Will dated 27.3.1974 executed by Dharam Singh in their favour. House of respondent-defendant is situated in the northern side of the house of the appellants-plaintiffs and the same is contiguous to their house, shown by letters 'AIJDCB' and in yellow colour in the site plan, Ex. P1. Earlier Amir Chand, predecessor-in-interest of respondent-defendant was owner of the said house, who also died about four years ago and after his death respondent-defendant became owner of the said house.

(3.) Amir Chand, father of respondent-defendant had instituted Suit No. 255 of 1970 on 21.8.1970 against Dharam Singh, predecessor-in-interest of the appellants-plaintiffs for possession by partition of half share of the entire property comprised in the respective houses of the parties. However, the said suit was decided against Amir Chand by learned trial Court holding that the property was not joint property of the parties and rather Dharam Singh was continuing in exclusive possession of the house, as shown by letters 'ABCDEFGH' in site plan Ex. P1 and Amir Chand was having no right in the said house and hence, he was held to have become owner of the said house by adverse possession and it was held that Amir Chand was the owner of the house contiguous to the house of Dharam Singh. No appeal against the said judgment was filed and the same has become final. Hence, plea has been taken that respondent-defendant is having no right to pass through the court-yard of the house of the plaintiffs for ingress to and egress from their house. It has also been pleaded that he is having separate passage from the northern side of his house for ingress to and egress from his house.