VED PARKASH Vs. BHARPAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Concisely, the facts, culminating in the commencement, relevant for the limited purpose of deciding the instant regular second appeal and emanating from the record, are that Smt.Bharpai widow of Tek Chand respondent-plaintiff (for brevity "the plaintiff") filed the suit for a decree of permanent injunction, restraining her son-in-law Ved Parkash son of Chandgi Ram appellant-defendant (for short "the defendant") from interfering in her peaceful possession over the house in dispute. Having completed all the codal formalities, the trial Court dismissed her (plaintiff) suit, by virtue of judgment and decree dated 12.8.1986.

(2.) Aggrieved by the decision of the trial Court, the plaintiff filed the appeal, which was accepted by the first appellate Court, by means of impugned judgment dated 9.1.1987, which, in substance, is (paras 8 to 10) as under:-

(3.) The appellant-defendant did not feel satisfied with the impugned judgment and decree of the Ist appellate Court and preferred the present regular second appeal.