JAI ONKAR SEWA ASHRAM SANGH Vs. BINDRO RANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff filed an application invoking order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking an order of temporary injunction as against the defendant but both the Courts below declined to grant an order of temporary injunction sought for by the plaintiff, hence the present Revision by the plaintiff.

(2.) It has been contended by the plaintiff that one Ved Parkash Sehgal and the defendant were originally owners in possession of the land measuring 4 Kanals 6 Marlas comprised in Rect. No. 58, Khasra No. 4/1 at Darra Kalan. Ved Parkash Sehgal donated his share of land to the plaintiff for construction of temple. In the year 2000, the defendant also gifted his share orally to the plaintiff for construction of temple. It is further contended that the plaintiff was shown to be in possession of the suit property as per Jamabandi for the year 2005-06. Alleging that the defendant was taking efforts to dispossess the plaintiff from the suit property, an application for interim injunction was filed by the plaintiff.

(3.) The defendant submitted in their reply that she was owner in possession of the land measuring 2 Kanals and 3 Marlas. She never gifted any property to the plaintiff. At the most, the plaintiff is the co-owner to an extent of land measuring 1 Kanal 17 Marla. The defendant is owner of the suit property to an extent of 2 Kanals 3 Marlas. It is submitted that the demarcation report dated 30.3.2012 would also reflect that the defendant is the owner in possession of 2 Kanals 3 Marlas of land. A partition suit has already been filed by one of the co-owners namely Vandna Sehgal, wife of Ved Parkash Sehgal. The plaintiff did not claim ownership over the entire suit property on the basis of the gift in the above suit, therefore, she has sought for dismissal of the suit.