SUDERSHAN KUMAR Vs. SMT. MEENA DEVI AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE challenge in this regular second appeal filed by Sudershan Kumar son of Budh Ram Appellant -Plaintiff (for brevity "the Plaintiff") is to the impugned judgment and decree dated 15.4.2010, vide which, the trial Court has dismissed his suit for a decree of permanent injunction and the impugned judgment and decree dated 22.3.2011, by means of which, the Ist appellate Court has dismissed his appeal as well.

(2.) AFTER hearing the learned Counsel for the Appellant -Plaintiff, going through the record with his valuable assistance and after deep consideration over the entire matter, to my mind, there is no merit in the instant regular appeal in this context.

(3.) THE concocted story put forth by the Plaintiff that on the same day of sale, he was inducted as a tenant by Defendant No. 1 on the plot in question, is not at all tenable, particularly when the Defendants have stoutly denied the same and rightly ignored by the Courts below. There was no occasion for Defendant No. 1 to induct the Plaintiff as a tenant on the same day of sale deed on the disputed plot.