CHANDAN SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. AJAY KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of RSA Nos. 4221 & 4922 of 2010 as similar facts are involved and the nature of claim also is the same since both the suits pertain to suit's for recovery by way of damages on account of burning of tractors and the defendants are also the same though the plaintiffs being owner of two tractors are different. The facts are being taken from RSA No. 4221 of 2010. The present appeal has been filed by the defendants against whom the suit for recovery by way of damages was decreed and a decree for recovery of Rs. 1,20,000/- with interest @ 4% per annum from the date of filing of the suit, i.e., 23.07.2002 on account of burning the tractor of the plaintiff.

(2.) The case of the plaintiff was that a mandir existed in Village Subana, Tehsil and District Jhajjar known as Radhey Shyam Thakur Dwara and Awadh Bihari Dass was the Mahant of the mandir and agricultural land measuring approximately 28 acres, standing in the name of the Gram Panchayat was given in 'Maffi' till the existence of the mandir 200 years ago and the Mahant of the mandir had been taking benefit of the land, cultivating himself or through someone else. On 27.04.2001, one Narayan Dass, who was Mahant of the mandir, died and the villagers of Samaspur Majra tried to take possession of the land of the mandir and the land was attached on 16.05.2001 under Section 145 Cr.P.C. by the order of SDM, Jhajjar and the Naib Tehsildar, Jhajjar was appointed as Receiver of the said land which was put to an open auction for cultivation for one year and Mahant Avadh Bihari Dass being the highest bidder was given the land in July, 2001 for cultivation for one year. It is the case of the plaintiff that he was driving his tractor bearing No.HR-14-2741 make Swaraj 724 when the defendants had poured diesel on the tractor of the plaintiffs and set it on fire and fully burnt the same. For the said incident, FIR No. 385 dated 11.08.2001 under Section 148, 149, 323, 435 IPC was lodged at Police Station Jhajjar and the case was pending against the defendants. The defendants were asked to make good the loss suffered but the defendants did not paid any heed to the requests of the plaintiffs, and accordingly, the suit had been filed.

(3.) The defendants appeared and filed their written statement and denied that any of them had gone to the disputed land and neither of them had set the tractor on fire or any other item but the factum of registration of the case was not denied. However, it was held that the case was false and registered by the local police in collusion with the plaintiffs.