PRITHVI SINGH Vs. SUMER CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this judgment, RSA No.3368 and 3868 of 2009 arising from a common judgment passed by the learned First Appellate Court shall stand disposed of. In fact, RSA No.3368 of 2009 has been filed by defendant No.5 whereas the other appeal has been filed by defendant No.3, 4, 6 and 7. The respondent No. 1 and 2 (the plaintiffs) filed a suit for grant of decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendant No.l to 7 from illegally and unauthorizedly interfering in their peaceful physical possession or by transferring or alienating any portion or part of plot Nos.l, 2, 3, 6, 7, 10, 17, 18, 19, 61 and the vacant space lying in between plot No.9 and 10 and vacant space lying on the back of plot No. 15 and 16 measuring 6ft x 75ft. They have asserted that in the year 1980, the property was partitioned after carving out plots in the joint land. It is further claimed that the property in dispute fell to the share of defendant No. 8 (the father of the plaintiffs) who met through a civil Court decree in favour of the plaintiffs in Civil Suit No.646 of 1993 decided on 08.11.1993. The defendants contested the suit by filing two separate written statements. One written statement was filed by defendant No.3, 4, 6 and 7 whereas separate written statement was filed by defendant No.5. Subsequently, defendant No.9 to 11 were added as party.

(2.) On completion of the pleadings, the trial Court, vide order dated 04.01.1999 framed the following issues:-

(3.) Both the Courts, on appreciation of evidence, have concurrently found out that the property was partitioned between the parties. Thus, the Courts have decreed the suit filed by the plaintiffs.