MOHAMMAD YUNUS AND ORS. Vs. SHAKUR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CM No. 657.C of 2011

(2.) THIS is application for impleading L Rs of Mahmood Defendant No. 1, Net Ram Plaintiff No. 4 and Subhash Plaintiff No. 5 since deceased. It is alleged that Defendant No. 1 has left behind two sons Shakur and Sadeeq as his only legal heirs. It is alleged that Net Ram has left behind his son Moola as his only legal heir. It is also mentioned that Subhash Plaintiff No. 5 has also since died. His son Parveen has been mentioned as his legal heir in the memo of parties as proforma Respondent No. 8. The application is accompanied by affidavit. Accordingly, the application is allowed subject to all just exceptions and Shakur and Sadeeq sons of Mahmood Defendant No. 1 are ordered to be impleaded as his legal representatives and Moola and Parveen are ordered to be impleaded as legal representatives of their respective fathers Net Ram Plaintiff No. 4 and Subhash Plaintiff No. 5 for the purpose of this appeal.

(3.) PLAINTIFFS alleged that they are in possession of the manure pits bearing killa No. 18/4(0 -4), 22(0 -10) and 23/1(1 -0) total measuring 1 kanal 14 marlas and they are using the said manure pits since the time of their fore -fathers. During consolidation proceedings the suit property was reserved for Plaintiffs as well as inhabitants of the village in public interest. Plaintiffs store their dung cakes, fuel wood etc. in the suit property. Defendants No. 1 to 4 in collusion with Defendant No. 5 Municipal Corporation, Faridabad (in short, MCF) were bent upon to take forcible possession of the suit land and intended to open their gates in the suit land towards road by constructing market/shops illegally and unlawfully. Plaintiffs claimed to have become owners of the suit land by adverse possession. Accordingly, Plaintiffs sought declaration that they have become owners in possession of the suit land by adverse possession. They also sought permanent injunction restraining the Defendants from interfering in possession of the Plaintiffs over the suit land. In the alternative, mandatory injunction directing Defendants to remove their possession from the suit land if they succeed in taking possession illegally, was also claimed.