JAI CHAND Vs. SADHU RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendants having remained unsuccessful concurrently in the two courts below, have approached this Court through the present Regular Second Appeal. The judgments and decree dated November 20, 1995 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jagadhri and dated October 15, 1992 passed by the learned Sub Judge Ist Class, Jagadhri have assailed in the present appeal.

(2.) FACTS . The plaintiff Sadhu Ram claimed himself to be owner in possession of the tubewell in dispute situated in land comprised in Khasra No. 40//24/2/2 bearing electric power connection No. C3-438. He filed a suit for permanent injunction for restraining the defendants from interfering in his exclusive use and possession of the tubewell in dispute. The tubewell in dispute was previously owned and possessed by Ram Chander son of Inder and Budh Ram father of Babu Ram and Sadhu Ram. Subsequently, the said tubewell came in the ownership and possession of Ram Chander. Sadhu Ram entered into an exchange with regard to the tubewell and thereafter the tubewell alongwith land came to be vested in Sadhu Ram. The plaintiff claims that he has been owner in possession of the suit land thereafter. Apprehending interference by the defendants, he filed the present suit.

(3.) THE learned trial Court, after taking into consideration the evidence led by the parties decreed the suit filed by the plaintiff. It was found that tubewell in question alongwith land was found existing in Khasra No. 40//24/2/2 and therefore, since the said land belongs to the plaintiff Sadhu Ram, therefore, tubewell in question was also owned by him. Accordingly, the suit was decreed. The defendant felt aggrieved, and filed an appeal before the First Appellate Court. The learned Additional District Judge, Jagadhri dismissed the appeal and upheld the finding recorded by the Court below.