DHARAM SINGH Vs. TEK CHAND AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the order of Additional District Judge, Bhiwani, granting ad -interim injunction in favour of the plaintiff. Plaintiff -Tek Chand (respondent No. 1 herein) and Dharam Singh, petitioner, are real brothers. Tek Chand, Dharam Singh and respondent Nos. 2 to 6 own land measuring 1 kanal 19 marlas comprised in Khewat No. 447/434, Khatoni No. 530 and Khasra No. 170/251(1 -8) and 711(0 -11). Out of this property, land measuring 11 marlas comprised in Khasra No. 711 is gair mumkin house situated in village Tigrana. The defendant threatened to raise construction over land measuring 11 marlas comprised comprised in Khasra No. 711 without consent of the plaintiff. The plaintiff, therefore, filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants form raising any construction over the suit land. The defendants contested the said suit. On an application filed by the plaintiff for ad interim injunction, the trial court initially granted ad -interim injunction, but after notice to defendants, the same was vacated. The plaintiff preferred an appeal before the Additional District Judge, Bhiwani against the order of trial court, The appellate Court allowed the said appeal of the plaintiff and granted injunction in favour of the plaintiff as the appellate court was of the view that there is no evidence to record a finding that defendants are in exclusive possession. The possession being joint of the owners, no co -sharer can raise any construction and change the nature of the land without the consent of other co -sharers. This order of the appellate court has been impugned by defendant No. 1 in this revision petition.

(2.) After hearing learned Counsel for the parties, I am of the view that no interference is called for in the order of learned Additional District Judge, Defendant No. 1 being one of the co -sharers in the entire land, is not entitled to exclusively appropriate the land himself to the detriment of other co -sharers. The other co -sharers are entitled to object in case they apprehend that they are going to suffer some injury materially affecting enjoyment of the joint land. The defendant No. 1 if so advised may get the property partitioned by meets and bounds and after getting the same partitioned, raise construction over the land falling to his share.

(3.) Resultantly, the revision petition is dismissed, but with no order as to costs.