SURENDER Vs. RAJENDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff-petitioner has filed the revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to set aside the order dtd. 15/2/2021 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Gurugram, whereby the temporary injunction granted by the trial Court has been vacated. The plaintiff filed the suit for declaration with consequential relief of permanent injunction claiming that he has become owner by way of adverse possession of land measuring 19 kanals 16 marlas as the defendants-respondents have never visited or taken care of the suit land.

(2.) The defendants contested the suit by taking a stand that they are in possession of the property and the plaintiff was only allowed to look after the land while the cultivating possession continued with them. It was further pleaded that on 19/1/2009, the defendants got the land demarcated from the revenue officials in the presence of Rajender son of Shah Mai, the brother of the plaintiff. Still further, the land in dispute was sought to be acquired vide a notification dtd. 31/12/2013 and the defendants, who are owners in possession, filed objections under Sec. 5-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Ultimately, the defendants were successful in getting the land released from the acquisition. The defendants further pleaded that the plaintiff by playing fraud upon the department of Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited, has obtained an electricity connection of domestic supply on the basis of an application dtd. 29/12/2019, but the cultivating possession still continues with the defendants.

(3.) As already noticed, the learned trial court directed the parties to maintain status quo as to possession, however, the learned first appellate court by a detailed judgment set aside the same after finding that there is no material to prove that the plaintiff is in settled possession of the land in dispute.